This conference call transcript was computer generated and almost certianly contains errors. This transcript is provided for information purposes only.EarningsCall, LLC makes no representation about the accuracy of the aforementioned transcript, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the information provided by the transcript.
spk07: Good day and welcome to the Archer Resources, Incorporated 4th Quarter 2023 earnings call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal conference specialist by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star then one on your touchtone phone. And to withdraw your question, please press star then two. Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Dex Lone, Vice President of Strategy. Please go ahead, sir.
spk03: Good morning from St. Louis and thanks for joining us today. Before we begin, let me remind you that certain statements made during this call, including statements relating to our expected future business and financial performance, may be considered forward-looking statements according to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. Forward-looking statements, by their nature, address matters that are, to different degrees, uncertain. These uncertainties, which are described in more detail in the annual and quarterly reports we filed with the SEC, may cause our actual future results to be materially different than those expressed in our forward-looking statements. We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law. I'd also like to remind you that you can find a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measures we plan to discuss this morning at the end of our press release, a copy of which we have posted in the Investor section of our website at archrsc.com. Also participating on this morning's call will be Paul Lang, our CEO, John Drexler, our COO, and Matt Gilgames, our CFO. After our formal remarks, we'll be happy to take questions. With that, I'll now turn the call over to Paul. Paul?
spk02: Thanks, Dick, and good morning, everyone. We appreciate your interest in Arch and are glad you could join us on the call this morning. Please report that during the fourth quarter, Arch continued to drive forward with our simple, consistent, and proven plan for long-term value creation and growth. Around the quarter just ended, the team achieved a just-adjusted EBITDA of $180 million, generated $127 million in discretionary accounting, bolstered our cash position by $107 million, consistent with our stated objective of building additional optionality for potential future stock repurchases, initiated plans to unwind the call instrument associated with the now-retired convertible securities, cleared a quarterly cash dividend of $32 million, or $1.65 per share, increasing the total capital deployed in our shareholder return program since it's relaunched two years ago for well over $1.2 billion, and achieved independent level A verification at the Lear Mine under the globally recognized Ford Sustainable Mining Framework, becoming the first U.S. mine of any type to do so. In short, we demonstrated strong progress against many of our strategic priorities spanning numerous critical areas of performance, including financial positioning, shareholder value creation, and sustainability. Critically, the team maintained its sharp focus on driving productivity improvements across the operating platform as well. Here, too, we made significant positive headway as we achieved a 10% quarter over quarter reduction in the average cost per ton in our metallurgical segment, secured a nearly 25% improvement in our average coke equal realization, and delivered an increase of more than 50% in our operating margin. Overall, the team delivered improved productivity, capitalized on a strong market environment, and continued to lay the foundation for still stronger execution in future periods. Before moving on, let me make a few additional comments about our highly successful capital return program. As we stated many times in the past, the capital return program is the centerpiece of our value proposition, and the central tenet of that program is the return to shareholders on effectively 100% of the company's discretionary cash flow over time. In any given quarter, of course, the amount of capital that is deployed in the program can and will vary based on several factors, including upcoming cash requirements on our minimum liquidity target and the like. But those are just timing issues and do not change the fact that over time, effectively all of the discretionary cash returns shareholders. On the Q3 call, as most of you will have noted, we signaled our intention of increasing our cash balance by $100 million or so, which we believe serves to enhance the potential for opportunistic sharing purchases in the event of a market pullback. During Q4, we accomplished that objective, adding $107 million to our cash position. With that completed, we believe we've now effectively positioned the company to continue the evolution of our capital allocation model towards a heavier sharing purchases in the future. Matt will comment on the subject further in his remarks, but a major step in this regard is to plan settlement of the cap call instrument that we expect to complete in the near future. The settlement of the cap call, in and of itself, should result in the retirement of nearly 2% of our outstanding shares. Turning our attention to the market dynamics, despite somewhat lackluster steel market fundamentals, coking coal markets appear reasonably well supported at present. ARCH's primary product, high-ballet coking coal, is currently being assessed at $262 per metric ton on the US East Coast, which, while a step down from the average price that prevailed last quarter, is still highly advantageous, particularly in line of ARCH's first quartile cost drop-up. Moreover, the Australian premium low-ball index is currently trading $63 per metric ton higher than the US East Coast price, which is creating an attractive arbitrage opportunity for select US volumes moving into the Asian market. Needless to say, we're sharply focused on trying to capitalize on that opportunity to the fullest extent possible. Of course, that focus on these opportunities aligns perfectly well with our early, well-advanced objective. Of increasing our penetration into Asian markets, we expect future steel demand to be centered. Primary reason that coking coal markets remain well supported in our estimation is a constraint of constrained supply stemming from ongoing reserve degradation and depletion, mounting regulatory pressures, limited capital availability, and persistent underinvestment. In 2023, according to TradeDana, Australian coking coal exports declined nearly 6% when compared to 2022. That brings a total decline in Australian exports to around 40 million metric tons, a more than 20% decrease since 2016, the peak year for our coking coal exports. While the US and Canadian coking coal exports in aggregate bounced back moderately in 2023, offsetting the Australian decline to some degree, production for those two countries remains well below their respective peak levels. As a result of these factors, we remain constructive on the seaboard coking coal market and expect to continue to be in an excellent position to capitalize on this environment going forward. Looking ahead, we remain sharply focused on pursuing operational excellence relentlessly and hitting our volume and cost targets, extending the reach of our high-quality coking coal products into the fastest-growing global markets, continuing to reward shareholders to our capital return program as it evolves towards a heavier share repurchase model, maintaining our strong financial position, while capitalizing on the optionality it affords during periods of market pullbacks, and advancing our industry-leading sustainability practices. We believe we're well positioned to drive forward with all these objectives in 2024 and beyond, and in doing so, continue to generate significant value for our shareholders. With that, I'll now turn the call over to John Dresch for further discussion of our operational performance in Q4. John?
spk04: Thanks Paul, and good morning everyone. As Paul just discussed, the ARCH team executed at a high level during Q4, delivering significant improvements against numerous operating metrics, while turning in another outstanding performance in the critically important area of sustainability. In our core metallurgical segment, the team's strong execution contributed to significantly higher realizations, significantly lower unit costs, and much improved operating margins. In our thermal segment, the team achieved a return to form at West Elk, as well as a solid contribution from the Potter River Basin assets, despite a softening thermal market environment. The upshot was a greater than 50% sequential increase in discretionary cash flow, which, as Paul noted, is the engine for our robust capital return program. Let's take a closer look at the performance of the metallurgical segment. During Q4, the metallurgical team delivered on one of its highest priorities, reducing its average cash cost by more than $10 or more than 10% when compared to Q3. That's a significant achievement, and one that serves to further solidify the metallurgical portfolio's position in the first quartile of the U.S. cost curve. Importantly, the improved performance at Lear South contributes markedly to these stronger results. As anticipated, Lear South experienced slower than normal advance rates and lower than normal yields in the first two months of the quarter, as the operation completed mining in Panel 5, where, as you will recall, the coal seam was appreciably thinner due to its position at the outer edge of the reserve block. However, the mine made up for lost time once it transitioned to Panel 6 in early December, resulting in a nearly 20% increase in output in Q4 versus Q3. Looking ahead to 2024, we expect continued productivity increases for the portfolio as a whole, as well as continuing improvements at Lear South over the course of year. As you will have noted, we are guiding the coking coal volumes of 8.8 million tons at the midpoint for full year 2024. In addition, we are guiding to an average cost for the metallurgical segment of $89.50 per ton, which is essentially flat versus 2023, despite inflationary pressures. More noteworthy, in my view, is the expectation of still further improvements in the metallurgical segment's performance as Lear South transitions to the second longwall district in late 2024. As previously discussed, we expect better mining conditions and a materially thicker coal seam as the Lear South longwall advances into District 2, based on our significantly expanded drilling program. At a time when many of our competitors are wrestling with the migration to less advantageous and higher cost reserves, we are fortunate to be moving in the opposite direction. Looking ahead, we currently expect a less than rattleable shipping schedule for our metallurgical segment here at the outset of 2024. The constraint in sales volume relates to weather-related disruptions, as well as unplanned and accelerated maintenance requirements at Curtis Bay, including a force majeure event that will affect vessel loadings in Q1. As you know, the Curtis Bay terminal is an important link in the Seaborn logistics chain for our Lear and Lear South operations, so this outage will have a volume impact. We currently expect Q1 volumes to be modestly less than rattleable. However, we expect the impact to be principally one of timing, which is to say we expect to make up for the mis-shipments as the year progresses. I might add that we have factored those events into our full year's sales volume guidance. Let's turn now to our thermal platform, which includes our West Elk longwall mine in Colorado, with its high-quality coal and competitive access to Seaborn markets, as well as our legacy Powder River Basin operations. During Q4, West Elk capitalized on the transition to a more advantageous area of the reserve base by delivering its highest quarterly production level of the year at around 1.1 million tons. As most of you are aware, this is consistent with the normal run rates we have achieved at West Elk in recent years. While the mine's overall financial contribution will continue to be muted to some degree by the need to make up for legacy price shipments that were missed in the second and third quarters of 2023, we expect a solid contribution in 2024 before a step up in gas generation in 2025 when we will be transitioning into the B-scene mid-year. More encouraging still, in my view, as with our metallurgical platform, West Elk expects to transition to even more attractive reserves in mid-2025 when longwall mining shifts to the B-scene. As we have shared in the past, the coal scene thickness is significantly greater and the coal quality appreciably better in the B-scene, which should translate into both higher volumes and stronger relative prices. This positive trajectory, coupled with the mine's access to Seaborn markets and its durable domestic industrial customer base, underscores West Elk's significant ongoing potential and further supports our belief that the mine will remain a value generating component of our operating portfolio for the next decade, if not longer. In the Pond and River Basin, the team made a solid financial contribution despite weakening market dynamics that resulted in a number of negotiated shipment deferrals based on customer requests. As always, we took steps to ensure that we preserve the value of our contract with these negotiated agreements and parlayed the deferrals into additional sales in outer years, but those deferrals still resulted in lighter volumes in Q4. Looking ahead to full year 2024, we have commitments in place for approximately 50 million tons of PRB coal at a price generally in line with our average realized price in 2023. As we have demonstrated repeatedly in recent years, we believe we can maintain our cost structure and preserve our ability to generate cash even at step-down production levels, should that prove necessary. Finally, let me emphasize once again that our harvest strategy, which is to say our focus on optimizing cash generation from our thermal assets, remains very much intact. Since the fourth quarter of 2016, the thermal segment has generated a total of nearly $1.4 million in adjusted EBITDA while expending just $172 million in capital. Before passing the baton to Matt, let me now spend a few minutes discussing our efforts in sustainability, which remains the very foundation of our corporate culture. During 2023, the company achieved an aggregate total lost time incident rate of 0.55 incidents for 200,000 hours worth, which is nearly four times better than the industry average. Perhaps even more impressively, the Lear and Lear South mines completed 519 and 329 consecutive days respectively without a single lost time incident. Those strings are nearly unprecedented for underground mines of their size and complexity and further underscore our progress towards our goal of zero incidents at every one of our mines every single year. On the environmental front, the company received zero environmental violations under SMAPRA versus an average of 11 by 10 of our large coal peers
spk00: and
spk04: recorded zero water quality exceedances for the third year in a row. Again, an impressive achievement by the team. Finally, and as Paul noted, our Lear operation became the first U.S. mine of any kind to achieve level A verification under the globally recognized Towards Sustainable Mining Framework. That accomplishment is further evidence of our deeply ingrained culture of continuous improvement and of our intense focus on raising the bar in all areas of our operating execution. With that, I will now turn the call over to Matt for some additional color on our financial results. Matt?
spk10: Thanks, John, and good morning, everyone. As usual, I'll begin with the discussion of cash flows and our liquidity position. For the fourth quarter, operating cash flow totaled $182 million, a sequential increase of nearly 40% from Q3 levels. As expected, we had a small working capital benefit in the quarter, contributing $7 million. Capital spending for the quarter totaled $55 million, and discretionary cash flow was $127 million. As planned, we grew our cash balance over the course of the quarter, an increase of $107 million. We ended the quarter with cash and short-term investments of $321 million and total liquidity of $444 million, including availability under our credit facilities. Debt at year end was $142 million, resulting in a net cash position of $178 million. We have achieved our objective of enhancing our flexibility and do not anticipate needing to materially add to the cash balance in 2024. Before moving on, I wanted to note a recent development in our outstanding debt that we completed shortly after year end. As you will recall, we paid down the vast majority of Arches term loan in early 2022, leaving a small stub outstanding because of the interaction between the loan and other parts of our debt structure. Earlier this month, we refinanced that stub with a new $20 million term loan. All of small transaction, the refinancing allows us to maintain the financial flexibility that we have grown accustomed to over the past several years without any material change in our ongoing debt service obligations. Next, I want to highlight a couple of notable financial accomplishments from 2023, starting with the capital return program. For the year, we deployed $355 million under the program, representing nearly 80% of the year's discretion and cash flow. That total includes dividends declared of $171 million, or $9.20 per share, and repurchases of common stock and diluted securities of $184 million. As for the remainder of the discretionary cash flow, we expect to deploy that opportunistically in future quarters. The second accomplishment is the ongoing reduction of our diluted share count and the simplification of our capital structure. Going back to the beginning of 2023, our diluted share count totaled approximately 20 million shares, with more than 11% of that comprised of diluted securities, primarily the remain convertible bonds and warrants. By the end of the year, the diluted share count was below 19 million shares, with diluted securities representing just 3% of while greatly simplifying the capital structure. As a final step in that simplification process, and another significant step in reducing the share count, we intend to unwind the cap call. By unwinding in the near term, we will receive shares representing the current fair value of the instrument, an estimate that could be as much as 2% of the fully diluted shares outstanding. While we are accepting a discount on the dollar value of the cap call, we believe that retiring the shares now, in advance of expected future capital returns, will prove more value creating than delaying the retirement until the maturity date in late 2025. Before turning the call over for questions, I would like to cover a few cash flow guidance and modeling items for 2024. First, we expect capital expenditures to be in the range of $160 million to $170 million, representing maintenance level spending. We currently expect that to be spread fairly radically over the course of the year. Second, we expect Archer's share of additional maintenance and improvements at DTA over and above the normal operating costs to be approximately $10 million. This is not included in our capex guidance, but is accounted for as an investment. I would also note that we expect this to be offset by additional income that we will generate from selling our excess capacity in the terminal to third parties. Third, with respect to cash taxes, at current middle-earth crisis, we would expect our cash taxes for the year to be near the bottom end of our guidance range as we continue to utilize our net operating loss carry forwards. Lastly, as we look at working capital trends, we typically see a cash outflow in the first quarter. We would expect that to be the case in this quarter as well, with an outflow of as much as $40 million. As we look at the full year, we currently expect to see a modest working capital benefit, which represents a tailwind of more than $80 million as compared to the working capital bill we experienced in 2023. To wrap up, Archer is 2024 in a great position to continue to deliver robust capital returns. It's only maintenance capital spending, minimal debt service obligations, the ability to utilize NOL carry forwards to minimize cash taxes, and a more favorable working capital trend. As we look at how we execute the capital return program, the combination of a streamlined capital structure, the reweighting of the program towards share repurchases, and the additional cash we currently have on hand positions us nicely to substantially reduce the share count this year. With that, we are ready to take questions. Operator, I'll turn the call back over to you.
spk07: Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you ask a question, you may press star then one on your touchtone phone. If you're using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you would like to withdraw your question, please press star then two. And at this time, we'll pause momentarily to assemble
spk11: our roster. And the first question will come from Lucas Pipes with
spk07: B. Riley. Please go ahead.
spk06: Thank you very much, Operator. Good morning. I first wanted to ask about the MedCole guide for 2024. And when I think about the midpoint, 8.8 million tons, and I compare that to 2023 sales of 8.6 million tons, kind of called a delta there of 200,000 tons at the midpoint. Little surprised given the transition at Lear South. And so I just wondered if you could maybe walk us through maybe some puts and takes across the Met portfolio. Would appreciate your perspective on that. Thank you.
spk04: Hey, Lucas. John Drexler. You know, as we look at the volume guidance for 2024, we're comfortable, you know, with what we have out there. We, as we've discussed, expect a continued opportunity to ramp at Lear South over the course of 2024. District two for us, which we've been talking about and sharing with you guys as well, is something that we'll be getting to towards the end of 2024. So, you know, that transition is continuing. The expectation for Lear South is around 3 million tons this year. And so that, for us, is kind of comfortable as you look at the rest of the portfolio. There's lots of things that happen operationally between longwall moves at each of our longwall operations over the course of the year, et cetera, timing. But we're comfortable with that 8.8. I'll share with you. The team is very focused on being higher than that number as we work over the course of the year. But as we kick the year off here, wanted to make sure we were all in a range that we were comfortable with. But we're very focused on improving that number as we work over the course of the
spk06: year. That's helpful. I appreciate the color. I'll turn over to the thermal side for a moment. And first, I wondered if you could maybe provide a mixed expectation between West Elk and the PRB, and then also where you kind of see PRB pricing contracted for 2024. Thank you.
spk04: Yeah, as we look at the thermal portfolio, we're excited about what we've seen and the progress we've made at West Elk. As we reported, we've gotten back essentially to expected run rates for that operation. As we got through the quarter, we were at a million tons. That's kind of where we expect to be as we work through 2024, so a million tons a quarter or four million tons for the year. The balance then comes over to the PRB. At West Elk, I'll note the real excitement is we're back to normal levels, but we're also going to be in a position where we're transitioning to the B-Sync. So development is occurring there. By the time we get to mid-2025, we're going to be in an even thicker coals, seeing better quality. So we're excited about that. In the PRB, the rest then spills back to the PRB. We've indicated that we're kind of at 50 million ton level. If you look at our guidance, the midpoint of that guidance, our commitments are actually slightly higher. Where we sit today, you see where natural gas prices is at. As we reported, we took advantage of the opportunity of some of our customers in 23 that needed to look at their commitments and their inventories. We were able to parlay that into additional volumes with some rollovers. In 24, it was about five million tons. So as we sit here today, we don't think it'd be unreasonable to think of something else in that magnitude, five million tons-ish that could be impacted as we work through 24. I would
spk03: add this that when it went down, we expect volumes to be higher. That's for sure. Volumes were only around three million tons in 2023. So we expect a meaningful step up to between four and four and a half million tons in 2024. But prices are likely to be lower. So obviously, the seaborne pricing has come down. We have some legacy contracts that we still need to service. So there's sort of sideways contribution despite the better results at West Elk from a production perspective, the better operations. Then the Power River Basin, that pricing is around $15 is kind of where we're committed to right now. We still think that creates the opportunity for us to generate a dollar to a $1.50 margin. So look overall for the thermal contribution, perhaps a small step down given the volumes are likely to be lower, but still a substantial contribution from the thermal segment. I know that doesn't necessarily come across from the guidance table because things like export tons are missing, et cetera. But we still think the thermal segment is going to contribute a significant amount of cash in 2024.
spk02: One thing I think I'd like to just kind of touch on again, and I think Jack and John have been talking about this for a while, is that we're not going to be able to get the value of the thermal that we're expecting. I know it's a little odd. We're guiding below what we're sold by about a million or a million and a half tons. I think it's just plain and simple to recognition of natural gas has fallen so much in the last couple of weeks that we're expecting a pretty hard pushback. We'll get that value. I think it's the reality, and I think we wanted to show it in our guidance.
spk06: Yeah, thank you. That's exactly what I wanted to get at. If you look at the guidance table, you're committed at, call it $17 and cash cost guidance is $16 to $17. So maybe to help us understand this better, in today's Newcastle price environment and what you have left to sell West Elk, maybe domestically as well, where would you expect that $1709 to trend in today's market environment? Thank you.
spk03: Look, maybe we'll punch on that. Right now, you can look at it as the netbacks could be sort of in the $40-plus range, but look, there are a lot of moving parts at West Elk, and again, we grant you that there's a little, that guidance table might cause a little confusion, but the reality is there are so many moving parts at West Elk, given in the wake of some of the quality issues we had in 2023, that we do think there is a meaningful margin still to be gained. And even with what I just described, in that sort of mid $40 range of netback, we still believe that when you sort of factor in some of the volumes that aren't priced, again, you're going to see a widening out and a solid margin from the thermal segment as well.
spk04: Lucas, I mean, you're hitting on it, with that additional export volume, even in newscastle prices that are down from where they have been, that will move that number up that's in the guidance table over the course of the year. I think that's kind of been the historical practice you would have seen from us as well, if you go back to the previous quarter's beginning of the year, et cetera.
spk06: Thank you. And sorry if I missed it. How many West Elk tons are uncommitted on price today? And would they all go into the export market with that $40 something netback?
spk03: So it would be, it's close to a million times that would not be priced as yet.
spk06: Got it. All right. This is very helpful, gentlemen. I really appreciate all the color, and I'll turn it over. Best of luck.
spk07: Thank you, Lucas. The next question will come from Katja Jancic with BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead.
spk05: Hi. Thank you for taking my question. Staying on West Elk, how much does West Elk contribute in 23?
spk11: So Katja, you know, once again, we're, as
spk04: we've indicated, this past year in 23 West Elk, while it was constrained and had issues, it produced 3 million tons. We expect that to grow to 4 million tons. So we do see an enhancement there, given where the international markets were and with some of the challenges we had, we still had a nice margin at West Elk. You've got, as we just talked about, some pressures in the markets themselves as we stepped into 24 at West Elk, but you see a very meaningful increase in volume. So the contribution we see is probably flatish between 23 and 24 and still results in a nice cash flow for that complex contributing to
spk03: the thermal signal. Maybe just a little bit more granularity, Dak, again. Probably $10 to $15 margin is how you would think about that for the 3 million tons. So if you think about that $10 to $15 margin, kind of what we're saying is, if you could see that volume that John just described, the 3 million tons step up to 4 plus, maybe that margin gets compressed a little bit in the current environment. So maybe that's helpful.
spk05: No, that's super helpful. Thank you. And then on the Met side, you're guiding 8.6 to 9. Do you still, over time, expect you can get to 10 million tons?
spk04: So Katya, I think as we've continued to have discussions around the Met portfolio, we are comfortable, especially as Lear South transitions into District 2, that we're going to see volumes at that 9 plus million ton level. We'll continue to do everything to focus on getting that to the highest amount of production that we can out of that portfolio. And we do expect it to be well north of 9. And that will be a great Met portfolio. And if we can push it up to 10, we'll be working to do that as well. But it's too early for that far out to really solidify some of that guidance.
spk02: Yeah, that is Paul. The one thing I'd add is, I'll give John and the team a lot of credit. As he noted in his remarks, we came through October, November, as expected, through some bad conditions. We hit December in the new panel. The mine ran as well as we've seen it run. And we know we can run the volume. So I gained a lot of confidence in what I saw and what I saw the team produce. So I still remain fairly optimistic.
spk05: OK, thank you. I'll hop back into the queue. Thank you, John.
spk07: The next question will come from Nathan Martin with the Benchmark Company. Please go ahead.
spk09: Yeah, thanks, Operator. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. Maybe just to follow up on that most recent question, as we think about the Met operations in general, again, I think you guys have done the past, eventually get to that 10 million ton run rate. But just to be clear, does that include the thermal byproduct tons? Because I know some people, I think, have likely assumed that was just coke and coal. So if that does include the byproduct tons, then in theory, your coke and coal tons, you know, more likely in the low 9 million kind of range. Just would be great to get your thoughts on the right way to think about that.
spk04: So Nathan, when we're talking about Met and these numbers, we're using it as the goal of ultimately maximizing the Met sales. That's just the Met. It excludes the thermal byproduct. As we mine across our portfolio as part of the production and processing, you are left with that product. So that's incremental to the volume, the Met volume that you have there. So if you add in the Met product, then yes, we will be over 10 million tons when you add back the impact of the Mids as we look longer term, absolutely.
spk09: Okay, John, just wanted to make sure that was clear for everyone. Appreciate that. And then maybe sticking with Met for a second. Any thoughts, guys, on this historically widespread between US East Coast Met coals like high volet and the Aussie Met coals, especially given your high portion of mix to HVA production? And then, you know, how do you see that possibly affecting your realized price return in 2024? And what do you think it takes for the spread to kind of return closer to normal?
spk03: Yeah, Nate, it's Jack. And let me take a shot at that and others can join in. Obviously, we don't have a perfect answer. This is a very wide differential historically. We think it's too wide. We think it will close over time because it creates significant arbitrage opportunity. But as you noted, the average over the past seven years between the average differential over the past seven years has been a $10 or so premium for premium low vol. Look, you can make the argument that the spread could, you know, could regally be assumed to be around $20. That's the transportation differential between moving tons from, say, Australia into Japan versus the US East Coast into Japan. But the fact is it's more than $50 today. One of the things I would point to is different products play different roles in cooking coal blends. And so, you know, right now, as we discussed, as Paul noted, cooking coal exports out of Australia are down 40 million tons, 40 million metric tons since 2016. And we continue to see operational challenges there. So there's real pressure on availability of premium low vol. And premium low vol does have a very specific role that it plays in blends. And so, look, I think there's scarcity there. I would add the fact that with costs and royalties, you know, moving up in Australia, that also is supporting that higher premium low vol price. Not to say that's justification because, again, we think this creates a significant arbitrage opportunity for us to sell our tons into the Asian market rather than into the Atlantic market and for the Asian buyers to reach it, you know, onto the US East Coast to pick up tons. So, look, we still expect that spread to contract. I do believe the fact that there are fewer, you know, US producers who really have a lot of experience and exposure in Asia. As more US producers get that exposure, you know, I do think that creates, you know, more of an opportunity to see that, you know, the, you know, equilibration of those two, you know, of those two prices. But look, we're glad to see the prices, you know, should be pulled up over time by the scarcity there.
spk02: Yeah, I think one of the interesting things, Nate, is that, you know, with Lear, we have that unusual ability for the US in that, you know, we can compete closer to a PLV because of the CSR plastic properties of the coal. And because of that, you know, we do get an opportunity to participate in that arbitrage. Look, it's a little odd, but, you know, I think Jack did a good summary of all the things that are going on that are creating it. But, you know, right now, you know, we have that ability to compete head to head and we'll take advantage of it while it exists. And we
spk03: are selling, we are taking advantage of it in some instances. So, there are times we're selling, you know, tied to PLV. In other instances, you know, it may be that there are buyers in Asia who aren't quite willing to pay that price because they don't need that full quality. So, you know, we can sell a lower quality product with a little more ash and take advantage of a blend between PLV and some of the other indices and still get a premium, the US East Coast price. So, you know, we absolutely are tapping into that and taking advantage, but it would be nice to see the entire East Coast, you know, market lift. And I think, again, that would take, you know, some of our competitors following suit and being able to sort of, you know, penetrate into Asia in the way we have.
spk09: Appreciate those comments, guys. And then maybe one final question, Paul, or maybe Matt, just as it relates to the discretionary cash flow. Again, you guys mentioned your decision to increase your cash position -over-quarter, obviously affected share repurchases. I think you only spent about three million in the fourth quarter there. You know, now the talk is moving to heavier, more opportunistic share repurchases. So, I guess first, can you provide maybe just some more details behind your decision to build that cash during 4Q? I think the average share price was below where it has been to start the year here. And then second, you know, should we expect, you know, the return of discretionary cash flow, obviously other than the dividend, to continue to kind of be lumpy? And then finally, would you expect to increase, you know, your buyback authorization as you shift to buying back more stock?
spk02: Vane, I think I'll start this, but I think this is probably a group effort. But, you know, as I look back with the capital return program in the last few years, in fact, there's very little that changed. You know, arguably, ARCH took the lead in this area and really set the standard for the colder. You know, the fundamental premise of our shareholder return program is really pretty simple. And we live by it. And, you know, this is the shareholder's money and we're going to return it. And we have shareholders that prefer dividends and shareholders that prefer buybacks. And we've tried to be responsive. You know, the decision to build the $100 million on the balance sheet was really irresponsible from some of our shareholders who thought we should really hold on to some dry power when we see pullbacks in the market. You know, like everybody in the commodity business, we've experienced significant volatility. You know, and I'd expect that to be the case in the future as well. You know, while we remain very constructive on the currency board, Coca-Cola market, our story in general, you know, our story in general also, and I think you see that by our willingness to exercise the cap call. Problem is when we see pullbacks, it generally coincides with lower cash balances on the balance sheet. And that's exactly what we're trying to take advantage of. So, you know, I look at our buybacks and, you know, the history of it has, I think, been pretty good stewards of the shareholder money. The 12 million shares we've bought back over the last six or seven years, we've averaged about $90. I think at this price and environment, it's a pretty good story. And, you know, we're clearly not better at picking the timing on buying and selling our investors. But, you know, we wanted to be prudent on how we deal with the buyback program and building cash towards the upper end target. Done with the goal of trying to be a little more responsive.
spk10: And maybe just add a little bit to that. You know, just to give you a specific example, if you go back to the middle of last summer, you know, we saw the stock price dip when the MED prices dipped. We were in the, you know, called $110 a share, maybe a little lower. And, you know, as we entered Q3 of that year, we were at minimum liquidity levels. So we had, you know, certainly we used the cash flow we were generating at the time to buy back. But if you look at our Q3 buybacks, you know, relatively weak, and if we had had a little dry powder at that time, could really have done something more substantial. And that's really the type of thing we're trying to build in the ability to do today is really be able to take advantage of those times. You know, there's going to be volatility in this industry. And, you know, we should be able to manage to take some of that volatility out of the trading for one, but also to take advantage of times when we think that the value has gotten a little lower than it should be. So, you know, I think that's the right way to look at the cash bill. When you think about, you know, the part of your question regarding the lumpiness of capital returns, look, for better or worse, the cash flows are fairly lumpy, the way the business runs. And so there's going to be some element of that. But hopefully what we've done by building some cash here is tried to smooth some of that out. And then as we look at the authorization, you know, look, we'll continue to watch that. I wouldn't be surprised if here in the next quarter or so we need to potentially refresh that authorization, but that'll be a discussion we'll have with the board when the time is right.
spk09: Very helpful, guys. Appreciate the time and best of luck in 24.
spk07: Thanks, Dave. The next question will come from Alex Hacking with Citi. Please go ahead.
spk08: Yeah, good morning. Can you hear me?
spk11: Oh,
spk08: hey. So I guess just coming back to Nate's question on HVA, you know, pricing, because your gap's pretty wide, right? I think, you know, FOB Australia, HCC was priced around $290 a short ton in the fourth quarter. You know, you guys are realizing $195. You know, it's a $100 gap, right? And a lot of that has to do with the pricing of HVA. I guess how much of the issue there is with all the new supply? Because, you know, Lear South's ramped up, and it seems like mine number four in Alabama has also transitioned to HVA. Like, is that the fundamental problem that we've just had a big chunk of new supply and the market's struggling to absorb it? Or is there something above and beyond that? Thank you.
spk03: So Alex, yeah, I mean, look, I think the right way to think about the spread with PLV is, you know, right now it's about a $53 differential. So, you know, that is simply a function of sort of market conditions and the aspects we talked about. Now, when you look at our average cooking co-realization, the average HVA price in Q4 was $281. You know, when you think about sort of the arch blended, you know, portfolio, you know, we might be talking about something more like $275 would have been sort of the average price that prevails. So you take that $275 and you say, okay, that's $275 metric, that's $250 short, you assume a $50 rail rate, that's $200. And then when we think about the fact we had North American volumes committed at 182, that were at a fixed price for about 20% of our volumes, it kind of lands you right on top of that $196 number. So look, I would say we're really delivering on that US East Coast HVA price or the US East Coast prices generally, we're capturing that realization fully. So, you know, we feel good about that. And I still believe that's the best proxy for us going forward is that US East Coast pricing, even though as indicated, there'll be instances when we try to bounce back about 5 million tons into Asia at the PLV price and instances where we can do that, or at a blended price in Asia. So look, we feel good about that. But I would say, you know, back to the issue of sort of what the difference was between PLV and HVA, again, some of those fundamentals that we discussed certainly don't view this as a new supply issue. Yes, you know, US production did bounce back about 5 million tons or exports bounced back about 5 million tons in 2023. But Australia was down, you know, 10 million tons. So, you know, in reality, the seaboard market, you know, was lost supply during 2023. So we certainly don't see that as the issue, you know, would suggest that the 5 million tons out of the US was really just for the most part, you know, ringing additional volumes out of the existing portfolio, there aren't a lot of shiny new assets being added. So we see, you know, sort of limitations to how much, you know, US can move up. But again, we think the market is really quite well supported. We think we'll continue to have opportunities to move additional volumes into Asia. We're shipping 40% of our tons into Asia today. We expect that to be, you know, 50% and relatively short order and probably 60 thereafter. So look, we're moving in the right direction into that sort of the center of, you know, the steelmaking future. And so feel good about all that.
spk08: Okay, thanks for the color. You actually kind of answered my second question, which was going to be around, you know, the tonnage that's going into Asia. So let me just ask, I guess, real quick, I apologize if I missed this, in terms of the shipments in the first quarter, they're going to be, you know, weaker impacted by some logistical issues. Did you quantify that? Or can you quantify that? Thanks.
spk04: We indicated they'd be less than rateable for the 8.8 million tons. You know, the word we used was modestly, I think, from a rateable perspective, you know, you could look to a 5 to 10% reduction from rateable on the 8.8. So, you know, that's a vessel or two, Alex. So, you know, that's just the kind of timing that you're talking about here. And we'll be making that up as we go forward. We don't have any concerns about that.
spk07: Okay, perfect.
spk03: And that suggests, Alex, just missing, that suggests missing, you know, look, two vessels, 150,000 tons. It doesn't take much for, you know, for volumes to slip from one quarter to the next. You know, look, Curtis Bay is moving quickly to resolve the issues. But, you know, when you're talking about a force measure event and an outage that, you know, span multiple days, that really does, you know, result in a change in kind of the efficiency and productivity of the facility. They did a great job of getting things lined out. But it was multiple days of outage. And so, again, it could have a small effect. And we want to be prepared for the fact that we could see a couple of vessels slip out of Q1 and Q2.
spk08: Okay, thanks. Makes sense. I get it. Every vessel counts. Thanks.
spk07: The next question will come from Michael Dudas with Vertical Research Partners. Please go ahead.
spk11: Hello, Michael. Hey, Michael. I have you muted, Mr. Dudas.
spk12: Thank you very much. Bad finger here. Good morning, everyone. So, anyway, first thing on the medical front, maybe Matt can go over, you're admirable with per ton cost flat. But what are your budgeting for 2024 on some of the input costs, labor, consumables, contracting, royalties, etc. What are moving at a better rate or higher rate than normal? I want to kind of contribute to help those costs as we move through 2024. And is that something similarly given with expected better volumes we could think about for 2025? Yeah, Michael,
spk04: no, a good question. I mean, you hit on everything. I mean, as the economy recovered, as supply chain issues prevailed, we saw significant inflationary pressures for the industry. We saw supply chain issues pushing things out, delaying major pieces of equipment, what have you. The team did a fantastic job of managing all of that and continues to do a great job of managing all of those things. We continue to see higher inflation in certain things that repair parts and supplies that we're acquiring. We're seeing other things where inflationary has slowed down significantly. So that all gets factored in from the labor perspective. Labor's tough in our industry. It really is. We've talked about this at length before. We're very fortunate that we've got great long live, low cost assets that operate incredibly safely, have a great culture. Our most important asset are our employees. And when they feel that way, our turnover is lower than others. But still, labor is another impact that is affecting the cost. As we sit here today to be able to move flat from 2023 to 2024, obviously with some modest improvements in volumes, but still hard work by the team to manage costs across the board. As we step forward into 2025, one of the wonderful things about our portfolio is our ability to continue to manage to that first half, quartile cost structure. Once again, high volumes, great assets, great people running them. And we think we're in a good position as we move forward.
spk12: Appreciate that. My second question, maybe for Paul, John, or maybe the group. Certainly there's been a pretty sizable shift in the thermal market in the US, where gas prices are meandering quite low. Maybe a sense of what your customers are thinking. Any thoughts on plant retirements pace or the speed up? And as you're thinking about the next several years, we did have a nice recovery when prices were strong because of the Ukraine issue a couple of years ago. And then the pace of maybe moderating or declining what the PRB assets will contribute in the marketplace, given what maybe could be a little longer trough in the market from a cyclical side relative to the other secular issues that face your customers.
spk02: Hi, this is Paul. I'll start off and let the other jump in. But as I've said in the past, we look at this situation from a pretty pragmatic point of view. The last coal-fired power plant built in the United States was 10 years ago. And last year, we saw about 13 gigawatts of coal-fired generation shut down in the US. And there's expected to be another seven gigawatts in 2024. The funny thing is, though, at the same time, 2023 was a record year for global coal consumption. Or excuse me, 2022 was. 2023 is looking like it also is going to be another record year. Now, the thermal market as well as the seaborne and Tokyo coal market, it still remains very strong. And if you have assets in the US that can get coal offshore, it still has a very good outlook. And West Elk is a prime example of that, where it's a coal that sits very well in the Asian market because of its low ash and low sulfur and high CV. So I think there is a diminishing role in the US for coal. Our kind of internal view is that the PRV will continue to drop about 5% or 10% a year. And I think what you're seeing, or we could see in 2024, heading into the early part of the year, is look at $1.70 natural gas. It's a pretty tough road to go forward.
spk03: And Michael, I would agree with all that, obviously. But look, last year, utility consumption around 390 million tons in the US. Go back to 2008, it was 1.1 billion. So clearly, there's been a pretty steep glide path here. We are absolutely prepared. If we start to see a plateau, we're prepared to continue to produce at a higher level, have the ability to do that, we'll take advantage of it. But I think we've been right to prepare for that sort of decline and do all the things that you know we've done, shrink the footprint, build the Thermal Mine Reclamation Fund. The PRV shipped about 230 million tons in total in 2023, as Paul said. Right now, we expect that to continue to step down 10% per year or so, probably makes sense. We could definitely see some delayed retirements of power plants. But that $1.50 or that $1.70 natural gas price right now is a green light saying, you're okay to close. I will say this, concerns about reliability are growing. There is more discussion. We'll see if we end up with some more significant delays. We've seen a few here lately. So we're prepared to go in the direction. If it continues to decline the way that it has, we're prepared to bring the plane in for a soft landing in the Pacific Ocean. If suddenly we see a plateau, we're also ready to capitalize.
spk04: Michael, I'll round out those comments with just the wonderful folks out at our operation have done an incredible job through the entirety of that cycle and through the decline over many years to continue to manage the asset in a nimbly and to do it in a way to manage the cost. You go back to the high water mark for the Potter River Basin or Black Thunder was 117 million tons. This year it was 60. Right now, you see us guiding to 50 through the entirety of that decade of change. The team there has embraced and continued to manage the cost and to be able to put us in a position to continue to generate cash. We've got high confidence no matter where that goes as we go forward
spk11: that we're in a position to do the same thing as well. The next question will come from Chris LaFima with
spk01: Jeffreese. Hey, thanks guys. It's Chris LaFima. I just had a question about the capital return strategy. Paul, you mentioned accumulating this cash as dry powder. You've talked about it in the past as well. You've targeted $100 million of cash build, which you achieved in the quarter. So as we go forward from here, let's assume that you don't get the pullback in your stock price. Should we then assume that all free cash flow will be returned to shareholders? It's really a question of whether it's dividends or buybacks, or do we continue to accumulate more cash waiting for that potential pullback to happen? That's my first question.
spk02: Chris, I think the real simple answer is that we got ourselves to where we said the upper end of our cash range is and we're ready to move on. I think we positioned ourselves very well. I think there's two strong arguments for heavier share repurchase right now. I think first and foremost, as we discussed earlier, the fundamentals for the biological segment are still pretty good. Pricing looks pretty strong over the medium to short term. That's probably not faked into dynamic or it's not reflected in our share price. Second, as John pointed out, we expect ongoing operational improvement in 2024 and 25. I think we set ourselves up well for what's coming. I feel good about the position we put ourselves.
spk10: One thing I'll add, Chris, as Paul said, on the cash balance, we're at the level we wanted to be at. I think I was pretty clear in my prepared remarks. We don't see the need to build that here in 2024. Maybe one data point, as we look at the cap call, which is going to be something similar to a share repurchase, the break even if you look at where we're at today from a share price perspective and where we would need to be in 2025 to make this a better bet to do it today, currently sits at a little less than $200 a share. If we look at it that way, we look at our plans, we look at what we think we'll be able to achieve in terms of capital returns over the next couple of years. We think it's better to do this today. Taking that and it's a share repurchase. We think we're in a position that in today's share price environment, we've got a lot of cash we're going to generate to buy back shares. Then if we do see a pullback and in the world where we don't have a pullback would be one of the first times I think we've seen something like that in a long time in our business. If we don't see a pullback, we're going to be spending 100% of the cash flow as we sit here today returning that to shareholders.
spk01: Is there a number on a pullback that you'd be looking for? I'm not sure if you can answer that question, but your stock's down 15% from its recent high. Is that enough of a pullback or does it have to be much more significant than that?
spk10: I don't think we want to get into where we're going to be at certain price points. I think where we sit today, what the stock has done in the same thing, I think we'd be fairly active in the repurchase program.
spk01: Excellent. Thank you.
spk11: Thanks Chris.
spk07: This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Paul Lang for any closing remarks. Please go ahead, sir.
spk02: Thank you again for your interest in ours. As I noted earlier, we remain focused on pursuing operational excellence, delivering on our volume and cost targets while driving continuous improvement across the portfolio. At the same time, we continue to reward shareholders to our cap return program. We're intensifying our focus on share repurchasing and opportunistically shrinking our diluted share count over time. That operator will conclude the call and we look forward to reporting the group in May. Stay safe and healthy, everyone.
spk07: Thank you. The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.
Disclaimer