The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Jharkhand | Chhau exponent dreams of dance school
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
2:27 AM
|
0 comments
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Monday, January 28, 2008
Fair skin sells in India's marketplace - Washington Post- msnbc.com
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
11:53 AM
|
0 comments
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
BBC NEWS | Africa | I ate children's hearts, ex-rebel says
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
3:16 AM
|
0 comments
Monday, January 21, 2008
The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Business | Mineral royalty faces tweak
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
11:33 PM
|
0 comments
Dharitri.com - Train Projects in Orissa for 2008 budget
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
9:25 PM
|
0 comments
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Document View - Iron Ore prices -
Document View
Mining Firms Bulk Up, Echoing Big Oil Mergers; BHP Bid for Rio Heralds A New Era for Resources; The OPEC of Iron Ore?
Patrick Barta and Robert Guy Matthews. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Dec 18, 2007. pg. A.1
Abstract (Summary)
The resulting megaminers would have great influence over the cost of raw materials like iron ore, copper and uranium -- and, by extension, the price of consumer electronics, cars and new apartment blocks. Freeport- McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. of New Orleans acquired Phelps Dodge Corp. of Phoenix; Vale bought Canada's Inco Ltd.; Xstrata took over Canadian nickel giant Falconbridge Ltd.; and Rio Tinto snatched up aluminum powerhouse Alcan Inc. As recently as early this decade, the mining sector was filled with relatively small companies with minimal pull on the world economy.
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text (2198 words)
(c) 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
MELBOURNE, Australia -- First there was Big Oil. Now comes Big Mining.
For years now, mining companies have gotten rich supplying the raw materials that have fueled consumer booms from China and India to Brazil. As commodities prices soared, these companies socked away cash and snapped up rivals. Now they are embarking on another round of deals that promises a new class of juggernauts. The resulting megaminers would have great influence over the cost of raw materials like iron ore, copper and uranium -- and, by extension, the price of consumer electronics, cars and new apartment blocks.
Last month, Anglo-Australian miner BHP Billiton announced a $125 billion proposal to merge with Anglo-Australian rival Rio Tinto. The deal would combine the world's No. 1 and No. 3 miners into a company worth as much as $320 billion at current market values -- bigger than every global oil company except Exxon Mobil Corp. and Russia's OAO Gazprom. It would be the world's largest producer of copper and aluminum, its No. 2 iron-ore provider and potentially the largest source of uranium.
BHP's proposal set off talk of more deals. Last week, the world's No. 5 mining company, Switzerland-based Xstrata PLC, suggested it was open to being taken over -- with likely suitors including the two other top five names, London-based Anglo American PLC and Brazil's Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, or Vale. This comes on top of more than $100 billion worth of mining deals in the past two years: Freeport- McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. of New Orleans acquired Phelps Dodge Corp. of Phoenix; Vale bought Canada's Inco Ltd.; Xstrata took over Canadian nickel giant Falconbridge Ltd.; and Rio Tinto snatched up aluminum powerhouse Alcan Inc.
As recently as early this decade, the mining sector was filled with relatively small companies with minimal pull on the world economy. But the acquisitions of recent years echo the oil-industry consolidation that began in the late 1990s and produced today's "super majors" -- Exxon joining with Mobil, Chevron with Texaco, and British Petroleum with both Amoco and Atlantic Richfield.
"If you look at the industry and the history of oil, really the same game is playing out," says Alex Gorbansky, a managing director at Frontier Strategy Group, a Washington, D.C.-based emerging-markets advisory firm.
Not all of the forces that united oil companies were like those driving Big Mining today. Commodity prices were depressed in the late 1990s, and oil companies thought merging would help them cut costs to survive hard times. Today's miners face the opposite challenge: Prices are so high that natural-resources companies have more cash than they know what to do with.
But the similarities are striking, say investors, bankers and analysts who study the sector. On the back of explosive growth in China and other developing countries, some mined commodities are taking on a strategic importance that's starting to rival that of crude. As with oil, most of the world's easy, high-grade mineral deposits have been tapped, leaving resources that are lower-grade, harder to reach or in politically challenging locations. By merging, miners hope to tackle the complex projects that remain.
Many Western miners hope their size and technical prowess will make them choice partners in countries such as Mongolia that need foreign expertise to develop their assets. Big Western miners are also bulking up to compete with new miners in countries including Russia and China.
Size will also matter in an era of increasing resource nationalism. Much as Russia and Venezuela cracked down on oil companies' access to local reserves, the likes of India, Indonesia and Bolivia are increasingly protective of their mineral resources. Megaminers with broad experience and well-known names could have more leverage to persuade such countries to open for development. On the flip side, should host governments decline to cooperate, big miners would have a portfolio of reserves to fall back on.
The Big Mining era could result in higher profits for leading companies, much as consolidation boosted earnings for Big Oil. But the trend could make life more difficult for consumers. A few big companies could have the power to wait out market weaknesses and keep prices high, by putting projects on hold or moving slowly to start new ones.
"The more concentration you get, the more monopoly power you get," says Amy Jaffe, an energy-studies fellow at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. In a November study, Ms. Jaffe found that oil-sector consolidation resulted in less oil, not more, from big companies. She suggests that's because big oil companies have spent money on dividends and share buybacks at the expense of new exploration. "People with monopoly power don't use it to decrease prices and develop more supply," she says.
Though a BHP-Rio deal is far from certain, the overture is the product of broad forces that analysts say are driving consolidation across the industry. A look at the proposed tie-up provides one scenario of how the world of Big Mining would look.
BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto both date to the 1800s, when their predecessors developed mines in Australia and Spain. Over the years, the companies grew through mergers and new mines to become two of the business's largest players. In the industry, BHP was known as the more aggressive, with risk-taking geologists who favored large, complex projects. Rio was seen as stuffy but financially savvy, with a tendency to talk down the value of its assets to manage investor expectations.
As recently as 2001, there were a dozen or more midsize players with market capitalizations of around $3 billion to $5 billion, and many smaller players. No single company achieved a dominant role.
Melbourne was an industry center. Two decades ago, the city of trams and Victorian-era buildings had scores of midsize mining houses, including several that became known collectively as the Collins House Group because they were located on a stretch of Collins Street downtown. Rival executives sometimes drank together at the posh Melbourne Club, housed in a 19th-century landmark building.
Business changed as the recent commodities boom gathered momentum starting in 2002. New mines were in great demand, but they were few and far between. In presentations to investors last year, former BHP Chief Executive Charles "Chip" Goodyear noted that mining companies were finding only a handful of major new deposits in the Western world each year, compared with 30 or more in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Most newer mines were based on deposits discovered years or decades before. Many had never been developed because they were in places that posed significant risk, like the Congo, or held relatively low-grade minerals.
Meanwhile, resource-rich countries have been tightening the screws on foreign investors. Earlier this year in Bolivia, authorities seized a tin smelter owned by Glencore International AG of Switzerland. Glencore protested but hasn't been compensated. Similarly, officials in mineral-rich Indonesia have stalled legislation that would clear the way for new foreign mining investments. Rio has been in talks with the Indonesian government since 2005 to develop a large nickel mine there but hasn't sealed a deal.
On another front, new competitors from developing countries were taking form. Russia's United Co. Rusal, the product of a three-way merger, elbowed Alcoa aside recently to become the world's biggest aluminum company. China Shenhua Energy Co., a coal producer, raised nearly $9 billion in the year's second-largest public stock offering. It aims to grow by acquiring assets overseas, it has said.
As BHP and Rio grappled with this new reality, cash from sales in emerging markets were piling up. Both companies' operations in iron ore -- a key component in steel -- were booming as highways, factories and apartment towers sprouted up across China. Chinese iron-ore demand has more than doubled since 2003, and the country now accounts for roughly half of the world's iron-ore imports, compared with 29% in 2003. Iron-ore prices have more than doubled in the past three years.
Mining companies boosted dividends and repurchased shares to appease investors, much as oil companies have done. But that didn't boost future growth prospects. So as Big Oil did in the 1990s, BHP and its cohorts began buying each other.
In 2005, BHP launched a $7 billion takeover of WMC Resources, an Australian copper, nickel and uranium miner and a mainstay of the Melbourne mining scene. Rio bought big stakes in other companies' undeveloped mines.
By 2007, the old midsize miners had practically disappeared from Melbourne. BHP and Rio, with high-rise offices downtown, were the undisputed heavyweights. Globally, the mining landscape was dominated by a handful of giant players, including BHP, Rio, Vale, Xstrata and Anglo American. BHP's market value is now on par with Chevron Corp. Brazil's Vale has a market capitalization bigger than ConocoPhillips.
BHP and Rio both positioned themselves for bigger deals. When Mr. Goodyear retired from BHP's top job earlier this year, the company chose South Africa-born Marius Kloppers, who held an M.B.A. and a Ph.D. in materials science. Mr. Kloppers had led the internal team that executed BHP's acquisition of WMC Resources.
Facing its own CEO vacancy, Rio tapped American Tom Albanese. At age 17, Mr. Albanese had set out from New Jersey to Alaska, persuading the University of Alaska to create a major for him called "mineral economics." He got a job staking claims in remote parts of the state, living out of a tent. Mr. Albanese joined Rio Tinto in 1993 and helped lead the company's effort to invest in a $3 billion project in Mongolia, Oyu Tolgoi, that analysts believe is one of the world's largest undeveloped copper and gold deposits.
As Rio's CEO, Mr. Albanese bought Alcan out from under rival Alcoa. When it was announced, the $40 billion deal was the mining sector's largest. Many analysts assumed it was driven in part by a desire to prevent other suitors -- including BHP -- from launching an attack on Rio.
In November, BHP said it was going after Rio anyway.
In a presentation laying out the proposal, BHP's Mr. Kloppers said he wanted to create a "super major" of mining. The company would focus on high-reward projects, including capital-intensive jobs smaller companies can't handle. "I would take my cue from some of the very effective work in the oil and gas sector when some of the super majors were put together," Mr. Kloppers said.
After a BHP-Rio merger, just two companies -- BHP-Rio and Brazil's Vale -- would control more than 70% of the world's iron-ore trade. (By contrast, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries controls only about 40% of global oil.) Likewise with uranium: About 70% of the world's supply now comes from 12 mines, including three controlled by BHP and Rio. One of BHP's Australian mines, Olympic Dam, has the largest known uranium reserves in the world. The speed with which megamining companies choose to develop such assets would have a large impact on world prices.
BHP and other large miners say they have no intention of slowing new developments to squeeze customers. BHP argues that a merger with Rio would help boost near-term supply because of the combined company's new efficiencies.
Rio's Mr. Albanese has downplayed the similarities with Big Oil, though he concurs it is getting harder to find good new projects. Rio officials have also argued that BHP's offer significantly undervalues its assets, and investors are waiting to see whether BHP comes back with a bigger one. But some kind of combination is likely, many analysts say. Many shareholders they've talked to approve of a merger in concept, they say.
The proposal has set other talks in motion. A few days after BHP's proposal was announced, Russia's Rusal said it was trying to acquire roughly 25% of OAO Norilsk Nickel, a major Russian nickel producer. People familiar with the situation say the Russian aluminum producer hopes a Norilsk stake would provide additional diversity to compete with a bulked-up BHP.
Rumors have also been swirling that Chinese steelmakers could launch a competing bid for Rio Tinto priced at about $200 billion. Most analysts believe such a deal would be hard to pull off, in part because of likely opposition from foreign governments.
"We're only talking about a couple of years before [China-based companies] are ready" for a deal the size of BHP-Rio, says Mark Pervan, an analyst at ANZ Bank in Melbourne.
"We're in a game of musical chairs," adds Wayne Atwell, a former Morgan Stanley mining analyst who's starting a resources fund, Pontis Global, in Stamford, Conn. "There are fewer and fewer chairs, and if you want to make another acquisition, you'd better make it now or it will be gone."
The outlook for mining could change dramatically in the event that China suffers a severe economic slowdown. In that case, commodity prices could fall significantly, leaving big miners with assets purchased at the top of the market.
But most industry observers expect Chinese demand to remain strong, and say the currents of consolidation are moving too quickly to keep the sector's remaining companies from joining in. When they do, they'll have to invent new ways to grow. One new idea now circulating in the industry: the possibility that Big Mining will start buying Big Oil companies.
Illustration
Enlarge 200%
Enlarge 400%
Mining Firms Bulk Up, Echoing Big Oil Mergers; BHP Bid for Rio Heralds A New Era for Resources; The OPEC of Iron Ore?
Patrick Barta and Robert Guy Matthews. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Dec 18, 2007. pg. A.1
Abstract (Summary)
The resulting megaminers would have great influence over the cost of raw materials like iron ore, copper and uranium -- and, by extension, the price of consumer electronics, cars and new apartment blocks. Freeport- McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. of New Orleans acquired Phelps Dodge Corp. of Phoenix; Vale bought Canada's Inco Ltd.; Xstrata took over Canadian nickel giant Falconbridge Ltd.; and Rio Tinto snatched up aluminum powerhouse Alcan Inc. As recently as early this decade, the mining sector was filled with relatively small companies with minimal pull on the world economy.
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text (2198 words)
(c) 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
MELBOURNE, Australia -- First there was Big Oil. Now comes Big Mining.
For years now, mining companies have gotten rich supplying the raw materials that have fueled consumer booms from China and India to Brazil. As commodities prices soared, these companies socked away cash and snapped up rivals. Now they are embarking on another round of deals that promises a new class of juggernauts. The resulting megaminers would have great influence over the cost of raw materials like iron ore, copper and uranium -- and, by extension, the price of consumer electronics, cars and new apartment blocks.
Last month, Anglo-Australian miner BHP Billiton announced a $125 billion proposal to merge with Anglo-Australian rival Rio Tinto. The deal would combine the world's No. 1 and No. 3 miners into a company worth as much as $320 billion at current market values -- bigger than every global oil company except Exxon Mobil Corp. and Russia's OAO Gazprom. It would be the world's largest producer of copper and aluminum, its No. 2 iron-ore provider and potentially the largest source of uranium.
BHP's proposal set off talk of more deals. Last week, the world's No. 5 mining company, Switzerland-based Xstrata PLC, suggested it was open to being taken over -- with likely suitors including the two other top five names, London-based Anglo American PLC and Brazil's Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, or Vale. This comes on top of more than $100 billion worth of mining deals in the past two years: Freeport- McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. of New Orleans acquired Phelps Dodge Corp. of Phoenix; Vale bought Canada's Inco Ltd.; Xstrata took over Canadian nickel giant Falconbridge Ltd.; and Rio Tinto snatched up aluminum powerhouse Alcan Inc.
As recently as early this decade, the mining sector was filled with relatively small companies with minimal pull on the world economy. But the acquisitions of recent years echo the oil-industry consolidation that began in the late 1990s and produced today's "super majors" -- Exxon joining with Mobil, Chevron with Texaco, and British Petroleum with both Amoco and Atlantic Richfield.
"If you look at the industry and the history of oil, really the same game is playing out," says Alex Gorbansky, a managing director at Frontier Strategy Group, a Washington, D.C.-based emerging-markets advisory firm.
Not all of the forces that united oil companies were like those driving Big Mining today. Commodity prices were depressed in the late 1990s, and oil companies thought merging would help them cut costs to survive hard times. Today's miners face the opposite challenge: Prices are so high that natural-resources companies have more cash than they know what to do with.
But the similarities are striking, say investors, bankers and analysts who study the sector. On the back of explosive growth in China and other developing countries, some mined commodities are taking on a strategic importance that's starting to rival that of crude. As with oil, most of the world's easy, high-grade mineral deposits have been tapped, leaving resources that are lower-grade, harder to reach or in politically challenging locations. By merging, miners hope to tackle the complex projects that remain.
Many Western miners hope their size and technical prowess will make them choice partners in countries such as Mongolia that need foreign expertise to develop their assets. Big Western miners are also bulking up to compete with new miners in countries including Russia and China.
Size will also matter in an era of increasing resource nationalism. Much as Russia and Venezuela cracked down on oil companies' access to local reserves, the likes of India, Indonesia and Bolivia are increasingly protective of their mineral resources. Megaminers with broad experience and well-known names could have more leverage to persuade such countries to open for development. On the flip side, should host governments decline to cooperate, big miners would have a portfolio of reserves to fall back on.
The Big Mining era could result in higher profits for leading companies, much as consolidation boosted earnings for Big Oil. But the trend could make life more difficult for consumers. A few big companies could have the power to wait out market weaknesses and keep prices high, by putting projects on hold or moving slowly to start new ones.
"The more concentration you get, the more monopoly power you get," says Amy Jaffe, an energy-studies fellow at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. In a November study, Ms. Jaffe found that oil-sector consolidation resulted in less oil, not more, from big companies. She suggests that's because big oil companies have spent money on dividends and share buybacks at the expense of new exploration. "People with monopoly power don't use it to decrease prices and develop more supply," she says.
Though a BHP-Rio deal is far from certain, the overture is the product of broad forces that analysts say are driving consolidation across the industry. A look at the proposed tie-up provides one scenario of how the world of Big Mining would look.
BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto both date to the 1800s, when their predecessors developed mines in Australia and Spain. Over the years, the companies grew through mergers and new mines to become two of the business's largest players. In the industry, BHP was known as the more aggressive, with risk-taking geologists who favored large, complex projects. Rio was seen as stuffy but financially savvy, with a tendency to talk down the value of its assets to manage investor expectations.
As recently as 2001, there were a dozen or more midsize players with market capitalizations of around $3 billion to $5 billion, and many smaller players. No single company achieved a dominant role.
Melbourne was an industry center. Two decades ago, the city of trams and Victorian-era buildings had scores of midsize mining houses, including several that became known collectively as the Collins House Group because they were located on a stretch of Collins Street downtown. Rival executives sometimes drank together at the posh Melbourne Club, housed in a 19th-century landmark building.
Business changed as the recent commodities boom gathered momentum starting in 2002. New mines were in great demand, but they were few and far between. In presentations to investors last year, former BHP Chief Executive Charles "Chip" Goodyear noted that mining companies were finding only a handful of major new deposits in the Western world each year, compared with 30 or more in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Most newer mines were based on deposits discovered years or decades before. Many had never been developed because they were in places that posed significant risk, like the Congo, or held relatively low-grade minerals.
Meanwhile, resource-rich countries have been tightening the screws on foreign investors. Earlier this year in Bolivia, authorities seized a tin smelter owned by Glencore International AG of Switzerland. Glencore protested but hasn't been compensated. Similarly, officials in mineral-rich Indonesia have stalled legislation that would clear the way for new foreign mining investments. Rio has been in talks with the Indonesian government since 2005 to develop a large nickel mine there but hasn't sealed a deal.
On another front, new competitors from developing countries were taking form. Russia's United Co. Rusal, the product of a three-way merger, elbowed Alcoa aside recently to become the world's biggest aluminum company. China Shenhua Energy Co., a coal producer, raised nearly $9 billion in the year's second-largest public stock offering. It aims to grow by acquiring assets overseas, it has said.
As BHP and Rio grappled with this new reality, cash from sales in emerging markets were piling up. Both companies' operations in iron ore -- a key component in steel -- were booming as highways, factories and apartment towers sprouted up across China. Chinese iron-ore demand has more than doubled since 2003, and the country now accounts for roughly half of the world's iron-ore imports, compared with 29% in 2003. Iron-ore prices have more than doubled in the past three years.
Mining companies boosted dividends and repurchased shares to appease investors, much as oil companies have done. But that didn't boost future growth prospects. So as Big Oil did in the 1990s, BHP and its cohorts began buying each other.
In 2005, BHP launched a $7 billion takeover of WMC Resources, an Australian copper, nickel and uranium miner and a mainstay of the Melbourne mining scene. Rio bought big stakes in other companies' undeveloped mines.
By 2007, the old midsize miners had practically disappeared from Melbourne. BHP and Rio, with high-rise offices downtown, were the undisputed heavyweights. Globally, the mining landscape was dominated by a handful of giant players, including BHP, Rio, Vale, Xstrata and Anglo American. BHP's market value is now on par with Chevron Corp. Brazil's Vale has a market capitalization bigger than ConocoPhillips.
BHP and Rio both positioned themselves for bigger deals. When Mr. Goodyear retired from BHP's top job earlier this year, the company chose South Africa-born Marius Kloppers, who held an M.B.A. and a Ph.D. in materials science. Mr. Kloppers had led the internal team that executed BHP's acquisition of WMC Resources.
Facing its own CEO vacancy, Rio tapped American Tom Albanese. At age 17, Mr. Albanese had set out from New Jersey to Alaska, persuading the University of Alaska to create a major for him called "mineral economics." He got a job staking claims in remote parts of the state, living out of a tent. Mr. Albanese joined Rio Tinto in 1993 and helped lead the company's effort to invest in a $3 billion project in Mongolia, Oyu Tolgoi, that analysts believe is one of the world's largest undeveloped copper and gold deposits.
As Rio's CEO, Mr. Albanese bought Alcan out from under rival Alcoa. When it was announced, the $40 billion deal was the mining sector's largest. Many analysts assumed it was driven in part by a desire to prevent other suitors -- including BHP -- from launching an attack on Rio.
In November, BHP said it was going after Rio anyway.
In a presentation laying out the proposal, BHP's Mr. Kloppers said he wanted to create a "super major" of mining. The company would focus on high-reward projects, including capital-intensive jobs smaller companies can't handle. "I would take my cue from some of the very effective work in the oil and gas sector when some of the super majors were put together," Mr. Kloppers said.
After a BHP-Rio merger, just two companies -- BHP-Rio and Brazil's Vale -- would control more than 70% of the world's iron-ore trade. (By contrast, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries controls only about 40% of global oil.) Likewise with uranium: About 70% of the world's supply now comes from 12 mines, including three controlled by BHP and Rio. One of BHP's Australian mines, Olympic Dam, has the largest known uranium reserves in the world. The speed with which megamining companies choose to develop such assets would have a large impact on world prices.
BHP and other large miners say they have no intention of slowing new developments to squeeze customers. BHP argues that a merger with Rio would help boost near-term supply because of the combined company's new efficiencies.
Rio's Mr. Albanese has downplayed the similarities with Big Oil, though he concurs it is getting harder to find good new projects. Rio officials have also argued that BHP's offer significantly undervalues its assets, and investors are waiting to see whether BHP comes back with a bigger one. But some kind of combination is likely, many analysts say. Many shareholders they've talked to approve of a merger in concept, they say.
The proposal has set other talks in motion. A few days after BHP's proposal was announced, Russia's Rusal said it was trying to acquire roughly 25% of OAO Norilsk Nickel, a major Russian nickel producer. People familiar with the situation say the Russian aluminum producer hopes a Norilsk stake would provide additional diversity to compete with a bulked-up BHP.
Rumors have also been swirling that Chinese steelmakers could launch a competing bid for Rio Tinto priced at about $200 billion. Most analysts believe such a deal would be hard to pull off, in part because of likely opposition from foreign governments.
"We're only talking about a couple of years before [China-based companies] are ready" for a deal the size of BHP-Rio, says Mark Pervan, an analyst at ANZ Bank in Melbourne.
"We're in a game of musical chairs," adds Wayne Atwell, a former Morgan Stanley mining analyst who's starting a resources fund, Pontis Global, in Stamford, Conn. "There are fewer and fewer chairs, and if you want to make another acquisition, you'd better make it now or it will be gone."
The outlook for mining could change dramatically in the event that China suffers a severe economic slowdown. In that case, commodity prices could fall significantly, leaving big miners with assets purchased at the top of the market.
But most industry observers expect Chinese demand to remain strong, and say the currents of consolidation are moving too quickly to keep the sector's remaining companies from joining in. When they do, they'll have to invent new ways to grow. One new idea now circulating in the industry: the possibility that Big Mining will start buying Big Oil companies.
Illustration
Enlarge 200%
Enlarge 400%
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
3:04 AM
|
0 comments
Document View - Iron Ore prices up from $75 /$85 to $180 to $190
Document View
Rio Tinto to Lift Ore Prices; Steelmakers Facing Hit As Miner Wields Clout Amid Commodity Boom
Robert Guy Matthews. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Jan 17, 2008. pg. A.13
Abstract (Summary)
In a move that could boost its profit but raise costs for its largest customers, mining titan Rio Tinto plans to charge steelmakers higher market prices for some crucial raw materials, despite long-term price contracts.
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text (537 words)
(c) 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
WEST ANGELAS, Australia -- In a move that could boost its profit but raise costs for its largest customers, mining titan Rio Tinto plans to charge steelmakers higher market prices for some crucial raw materials, despite long-term price contracts.
The move marks an effort by the mining company to capture higher spot-market prices for iron ore, a key steelmaking ingredient. It illustrates the clout mining companies have amassed during the four- year boom in commodities.
Rio Tinto's move would affect 10% of the iron ore it supplies to long-term customers. Those customers, who currently pay about $75 to $85 a metric ton, could pay the same prices as on the open spot market, where iron ore is fetching about $180 to $190 a metric ton due to rising demand.
Doing so would significantly raise the profit of Rio Tinto, which is trying to fend off a hostile bid from rival BHP Billiton. Rio's move also could squeeze steelmakers, which have seen profits hurt by high energy and raw-material costs.
It is unclear how steelmakers may respond. Corus, which is owned by India's Tata Group, had no immediate comment. ArcelorMittal, the world's largest steelmaker by output, declined to comment.
Many steelmakers have been successful in passing on higher costs to customers like car and appliance makers, but those industries are feeling cost pressure. Global auto makers, in particular, have in part cited rising material costs for pinched profits and, in some cases, losses.
Rio's move could accelerate efforts by steelmakers to secure their own reserves of iron ore to make them less dependent on mining companies. ArcelorMittal already has about 40% of its own iron-ore supplies. Most vulnerable are steelmakers in Asia, which depend on Australian iron ore to make steel. U.S. steelmakers enjoy better access to domestic iron-ore supplies.
Rio Tinto is exercising a little-known clause in its iron-ore contracts that allows the company to supply just 90% of the contracted iron ore at a fixed, negotiated price. The other 10%, at the discretion of Rio Tinto, could be priced according to the spot market.
"We are being more aggressive now," said Sam Walsh, chief executive officer of Rio Tinto's iron-ore division.
It isn't clear whether other miners will follow Rio Tinto's interpretation of long-term contracts. A BHP spokeswoman said the company hasn't notified customers on long-term contracts that they would be expected to pay spot prices for some of their shipments. A spokeswoman at Brazil's Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, known as Vale, declined to comment, citing confidentiality.
Steelmakers have been bracing for a price rise and have said they would pass those higher costs on to customers. The move comes as Rio, BHP and Vale, the world's three largest exporters of iron ore, and steelmakers are currently negotiating long-term contracts, which are set to expire in June. Some Chinese steelmakers that are leading some of the contract negotiations with the miners say that the miners want a 75% increase -- an unprecedented amount if it sticks.
Mr. Walsh declined to specify how much Rio wanted from the long-term talks but said that a 75% increase still wouldn't make up the difference between spot and benchmark prices.
---
Kris Maher in Pittsburgh contributed to this article.
Illustration
Enlarge 200%
Enlarge 400%
Rio Tinto to Lift Ore Prices; Steelmakers Facing Hit As Miner Wields Clout Amid Commodity Boom
Robert Guy Matthews. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Jan 17, 2008. pg. A.13
Abstract (Summary)
In a move that could boost its profit but raise costs for its largest customers, mining titan Rio Tinto plans to charge steelmakers higher market prices for some crucial raw materials, despite long-term price contracts.
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text (537 words)
(c) 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
WEST ANGELAS, Australia -- In a move that could boost its profit but raise costs for its largest customers, mining titan Rio Tinto plans to charge steelmakers higher market prices for some crucial raw materials, despite long-term price contracts.
The move marks an effort by the mining company to capture higher spot-market prices for iron ore, a key steelmaking ingredient. It illustrates the clout mining companies have amassed during the four- year boom in commodities.
Rio Tinto's move would affect 10% of the iron ore it supplies to long-term customers. Those customers, who currently pay about $75 to $85 a metric ton, could pay the same prices as on the open spot market, where iron ore is fetching about $180 to $190 a metric ton due to rising demand.
Doing so would significantly raise the profit of Rio Tinto, which is trying to fend off a hostile bid from rival BHP Billiton. Rio's move also could squeeze steelmakers, which have seen profits hurt by high energy and raw-material costs.
It is unclear how steelmakers may respond. Corus, which is owned by India's Tata Group, had no immediate comment. ArcelorMittal, the world's largest steelmaker by output, declined to comment.
Many steelmakers have been successful in passing on higher costs to customers like car and appliance makers, but those industries are feeling cost pressure. Global auto makers, in particular, have in part cited rising material costs for pinched profits and, in some cases, losses.
Rio's move could accelerate efforts by steelmakers to secure their own reserves of iron ore to make them less dependent on mining companies. ArcelorMittal already has about 40% of its own iron-ore supplies. Most vulnerable are steelmakers in Asia, which depend on Australian iron ore to make steel. U.S. steelmakers enjoy better access to domestic iron-ore supplies.
Rio Tinto is exercising a little-known clause in its iron-ore contracts that allows the company to supply just 90% of the contracted iron ore at a fixed, negotiated price. The other 10%, at the discretion of Rio Tinto, could be priced according to the spot market.
"We are being more aggressive now," said Sam Walsh, chief executive officer of Rio Tinto's iron-ore division.
It isn't clear whether other miners will follow Rio Tinto's interpretation of long-term contracts. A BHP spokeswoman said the company hasn't notified customers on long-term contracts that they would be expected to pay spot prices for some of their shipments. A spokeswoman at Brazil's Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, known as Vale, declined to comment, citing confidentiality.
Steelmakers have been bracing for a price rise and have said they would pass those higher costs on to customers. The move comes as Rio, BHP and Vale, the world's three largest exporters of iron ore, and steelmakers are currently negotiating long-term contracts, which are set to expire in June. Some Chinese steelmakers that are leading some of the contract negotiations with the miners say that the miners want a 75% increase -- an unprecedented amount if it sticks.
Mr. Walsh declined to specify how much Rio wanted from the long-term talks but said that a 75% increase still wouldn't make up the difference between spot and benchmark prices.
---
Kris Maher in Pittsburgh contributed to this article.
Illustration
Enlarge 200%
Enlarge 400%
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
2:35 AM
|
0 comments
Document View - World Bank Disgrace
Document View
World Bank Disgrace
Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Jan 14, 2008. pg. A.12
Abstract (Summary)
In the AIDS Control Project, "the bank appeared to pay scant attention to the performance and quality of the goods supplied to the blood banks and testing centers, instead focusing on the number of such facilities being erected."
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text (867 words)
(c) 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Credit Robert Zoellick for knowing how to put the best face on a profound embarrassment. On Friday, the World Bank president announced in a press release that the bank had "joined forces" with the government of India to "fight fraud and corruption" in that country's health sector. This is happening at the same time that Mr. Zoellick's colleagues are hounding bank anticorruption chief Suzanne Rich Folsom, the person primarily responsible for bringing the scandals to light.
Corruption is an endemic problem in bank projects, swallowing unknown but significant chunks from its $30 billion-plus annual portfolio. No less a problem has been the bank staff's ferocious resistance to anything that might stand in the way of its lending ever more money to projects run by the same governments that tolerate this malfeasance.
---
Yet nothing we've seen so far can compare to what has now been uncovered about five health projects in India, involving $569 million in loans. The projects were the subject of a "Detailed Implementation Review," a lengthy forensic examination undertaken by Ms. Folsom's Department of Institutional Integrity, known within the bank as INT. As of this writing the bank has not publicly released the review, though it's been shared with the bank's board. But we've seen a copy and are posting its executive summary on wsj.com/opinion and OpinionJournal.com. We are also posting photographs that show the real price that corruption in bank projects exacts on the poor. Here are some of the lowlights:
In the $54 million "Food and Drug Capacity Building Project," for which money is still being disbursed, the INT found "questionable procurement practices, some of which indicate fraud and corruption, in contracts representing 87 percent of the number of pieces and 88 percent of the total value of equipment procured." That is nearly $9 of every $10 in aid funds.
For the $194 million "Second National AIDS Control Project," the INT discovered that "some of the test kits supplied by particular companies often performed poorly by producing erroneous or invalid results, potentially resulting in the further spread of disease."
In the $114 million "Malaria Control Project," the review found "numerous indicators of poor product quality in the bed nets supplied by the firms." And in the $125 million "Tuberculosis Control Project," the INT discovered "bidders sharing the same address and telephone numbers, unit prices showing a common formula, and indicators of intent to split contract awards among several bidders."
After visiting 55 hospitals connected to the bank's $82 million "Orissa Health Systems Development Project" (Orissa is one of India's poorest states), INT investigators found "uninitiated and uncompleted work, severely leaking roofs, crumbling ceilings, molding walls, and non-functional water, sewage, and/or electrical systems." It also found "neonatal equipment that lacked adequate electrical grounding, potentially exposing babies and their medical staff to electrical shocks."
All this would be bad enough if Indian companies or officials were making off with ill-gotten gains behind the backs of World Bank staff. Instead, the INT found evidence of the bank repeatedly looking the other way. In the case of Orissa's 55 "hospitals," the INT found that the "construction management consultants (CMCs) who supervised the work certified that 38 of these hospitals to be complete to project specifications." In the AIDS Control Project, "the bank appeared to pay scant attention to the performance and quality of the goods supplied to the blood banks and testing centers, instead focusing on the number of such facilities being erected."
The report goes on in this vein for hundreds of pages. With the exception of Paul Volcker's investigation of the U.N. Oil for Food scandal, we can think of no comparable review of an international organization that has brought such damaging facts to light, certainly not one that was internally conducted.
Yet not only does Mr. Zoellick's press release fail to praise INT's dogged achievement, it ignores Ms. Folsom altogether. It does, however, give pride of place to bank managing director Ngozi Okonjo- Iweala, who was recently hired by Mr. Zoellick and is quoted as saying she is encouraged by the Indian government's "strong resolve" to deal with corruption.
We'll believe that resolve when we see it. Such promises would be more credible if Mr. Zoellick took meaningful steps to hold accountable those in the bank who acquiesce in this corruption. Former President Paul Wolfowitz showed real spine when he stopped lending to a related Indian health project after a previous INT investigation uncovered fraud. Yet lending to Indian health projects resumed the moment he departed last year.
We wonder, for example, what this now-documented Indian corruption means for the career of Praful Patel, who has been running the bank's South Asia operations since 2003, and for Managing Director Graeme Wheeler, who until recently oversaw Mr. Patel's work. Instead of accountability for these supervisors, the bank offers up the Orwellian contrivance by which Ms. Folsom has been whited-out from this story, like the proverbial vanishing commissar.
The foreign aid lobby sometimes says that corruption is the inevitable price of "doing good" in the developing world. Our online readers should look at the photographs of hazardous laboratories and sewage overflowing in hospitals, and wonder how anyone can make that case with a clear conscience.
World Bank Disgrace
Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Jan 14, 2008. pg. A.12
Abstract (Summary)
In the AIDS Control Project, "the bank appeared to pay scant attention to the performance and quality of the goods supplied to the blood banks and testing centers, instead focusing on the number of such facilities being erected."
» Jump to indexing (document details)
Full Text (867 words)
(c) 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Credit Robert Zoellick for knowing how to put the best face on a profound embarrassment. On Friday, the World Bank president announced in a press release that the bank had "joined forces" with the government of India to "fight fraud and corruption" in that country's health sector. This is happening at the same time that Mr. Zoellick's colleagues are hounding bank anticorruption chief Suzanne Rich Folsom, the person primarily responsible for bringing the scandals to light.
Corruption is an endemic problem in bank projects, swallowing unknown but significant chunks from its $30 billion-plus annual portfolio. No less a problem has been the bank staff's ferocious resistance to anything that might stand in the way of its lending ever more money to projects run by the same governments that tolerate this malfeasance.
---
Yet nothing we've seen so far can compare to what has now been uncovered about five health projects in India, involving $569 million in loans. The projects were the subject of a "Detailed Implementation Review," a lengthy forensic examination undertaken by Ms. Folsom's Department of Institutional Integrity, known within the bank as INT. As of this writing the bank has not publicly released the review, though it's been shared with the bank's board. But we've seen a copy and are posting its executive summary on wsj.com/opinion and OpinionJournal.com. We are also posting photographs that show the real price that corruption in bank projects exacts on the poor. Here are some of the lowlights:
In the $54 million "Food and Drug Capacity Building Project," for which money is still being disbursed, the INT found "questionable procurement practices, some of which indicate fraud and corruption, in contracts representing 87 percent of the number of pieces and 88 percent of the total value of equipment procured." That is nearly $9 of every $10 in aid funds.
For the $194 million "Second National AIDS Control Project," the INT discovered that "some of the test kits supplied by particular companies often performed poorly by producing erroneous or invalid results, potentially resulting in the further spread of disease."
In the $114 million "Malaria Control Project," the review found "numerous indicators of poor product quality in the bed nets supplied by the firms." And in the $125 million "Tuberculosis Control Project," the INT discovered "bidders sharing the same address and telephone numbers, unit prices showing a common formula, and indicators of intent to split contract awards among several bidders."
After visiting 55 hospitals connected to the bank's $82 million "Orissa Health Systems Development Project" (Orissa is one of India's poorest states), INT investigators found "uninitiated and uncompleted work, severely leaking roofs, crumbling ceilings, molding walls, and non-functional water, sewage, and/or electrical systems." It also found "neonatal equipment that lacked adequate electrical grounding, potentially exposing babies and their medical staff to electrical shocks."
All this would be bad enough if Indian companies or officials were making off with ill-gotten gains behind the backs of World Bank staff. Instead, the INT found evidence of the bank repeatedly looking the other way. In the case of Orissa's 55 "hospitals," the INT found that the "construction management consultants (CMCs) who supervised the work certified that 38 of these hospitals to be complete to project specifications." In the AIDS Control Project, "the bank appeared to pay scant attention to the performance and quality of the goods supplied to the blood banks and testing centers, instead focusing on the number of such facilities being erected."
The report goes on in this vein for hundreds of pages. With the exception of Paul Volcker's investigation of the U.N. Oil for Food scandal, we can think of no comparable review of an international organization that has brought such damaging facts to light, certainly not one that was internally conducted.
Yet not only does Mr. Zoellick's press release fail to praise INT's dogged achievement, it ignores Ms. Folsom altogether. It does, however, give pride of place to bank managing director Ngozi Okonjo- Iweala, who was recently hired by Mr. Zoellick and is quoted as saying she is encouraged by the Indian government's "strong resolve" to deal with corruption.
We'll believe that resolve when we see it. Such promises would be more credible if Mr. Zoellick took meaningful steps to hold accountable those in the bank who acquiesce in this corruption. Former President Paul Wolfowitz showed real spine when he stopped lending to a related Indian health project after a previous INT investigation uncovered fraud. Yet lending to Indian health projects resumed the moment he departed last year.
We wonder, for example, what this now-documented Indian corruption means for the career of Praful Patel, who has been running the bank's South Asia operations since 2003, and for Managing Director Graeme Wheeler, who until recently oversaw Mr. Patel's work. Instead of accountability for these supervisors, the bank offers up the Orwellian contrivance by which Ms. Folsom has been whited-out from this story, like the proverbial vanishing commissar.
The foreign aid lobby sometimes says that corruption is the inevitable price of "doing good" in the developing world. Our online readers should look at the photographs of hazardous laboratories and sewage overflowing in hospitals, and wonder how anyone can make that case with a clear conscience.
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
1:28 AM
|
0 comments
Friday, January 18, 2008
Thursday, January 17, 2008
The Telegraph -Calcutta : Ambani brothers talk trillions Refining boosts Reliance turnover
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
10:37 PM
|
0 comments
The Telegraph - 7 - 1/2 % Royalty -Calcutta-Mineral royalty faces tweak
The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Business | Mineral royalty faces tweak
Mineral royalty faces tweak
JAYANTA ROY CHOWDHURY
NEW RULES
New Delhi, Jan. 13: The Centre is planning to charge royalty on major minerals on an ad-valorem basis against the current practice of charging specific rates.
Royalties are paid by mining companies, and the move follows pressure from mineral-rich states such as Orissa, Jharkhand, Karnataka and Rajasthan.
A royalty of 7.5 per cent is likely to be charged on iron ore, which could increase earnings of states such as Orissa and Karnataka four- to six-fold from this mineral alone.
An ad-valorem duty is one that is determined according to the cost or market value of the article taxed, while a specific duty is a fixed sum assessed on an article without a reference to its value or market.
At present, a fixed sum is charged as royalty on a per-tonne basis. This has not been revised for many years, while prices of minerals such as iron ore and coal have gone up considerably.
State governments have, naturally, been extremely unhappy with the pittance they are earning as royalty compared with the huge profits mining companies have been making from their territories.
Top officials said the government would give effect to this key recommendation of the Hooda committee on mineral resources in the budget.
Royalty on iron ore varies from Rs 11 a tonne to Rs 27 a tonne depending on composition of the ore.
Karnataka, which mines about 35 million tonnes of iron ore every year, worth about Rs 6,500 crore, earns a mere Rs 165 crore as royalty.
An export tax of Rs 300 per tonne aimed at discouraging sales of high-grade ore to India’s rivals such as China may, however, remain.
There may be a rethink if China agrees to barter high-grade coking coal for Indian iron ore.
The tax was imposed after Indian steel makers said good quality ore was being exported to China which at the same time was denying them access to its high-grade coking coal reserves.
Top officials said the decision to accept the royalty recommendations had been taken after the chief ministers of several mineral-rich states wrote to the Prime Minister about low royalty realisations.
This comes at a time when the Centre is contemplating auctioning of mines, which will in effect take away the power of states to recommend mining grants for companies.
States have used this power to bargain with steel makers for huge investment commitments in lieu of mining licences. The Centre wants to take away this power as it feels it is unfair on states such as Bengal and Maharashtra, which may be short on mineral resources but have markets for finished steel or other key resources that steel makers use.
Besides, the process of auctioning mining rights will be more transparent and address local concerns over grants of mining licences being fraught with corruption.
Mineral royalty faces tweak
JAYANTA ROY CHOWDHURY
NEW RULES
New Delhi, Jan. 13: The Centre is planning to charge royalty on major minerals on an ad-valorem basis against the current practice of charging specific rates.
Royalties are paid by mining companies, and the move follows pressure from mineral-rich states such as Orissa, Jharkhand, Karnataka and Rajasthan.
A royalty of 7.5 per cent is likely to be charged on iron ore, which could increase earnings of states such as Orissa and Karnataka four- to six-fold from this mineral alone.
An ad-valorem duty is one that is determined according to the cost or market value of the article taxed, while a specific duty is a fixed sum assessed on an article without a reference to its value or market.
At present, a fixed sum is charged as royalty on a per-tonne basis. This has not been revised for many years, while prices of minerals such as iron ore and coal have gone up considerably.
State governments have, naturally, been extremely unhappy with the pittance they are earning as royalty compared with the huge profits mining companies have been making from their territories.
Top officials said the government would give effect to this key recommendation of the Hooda committee on mineral resources in the budget.
Royalty on iron ore varies from Rs 11 a tonne to Rs 27 a tonne depending on composition of the ore.
Karnataka, which mines about 35 million tonnes of iron ore every year, worth about Rs 6,500 crore, earns a mere Rs 165 crore as royalty.
An export tax of Rs 300 per tonne aimed at discouraging sales of high-grade ore to India’s rivals such as China may, however, remain.
There may be a rethink if China agrees to barter high-grade coking coal for Indian iron ore.
The tax was imposed after Indian steel makers said good quality ore was being exported to China which at the same time was denying them access to its high-grade coking coal reserves.
Top officials said the decision to accept the royalty recommendations had been taken after the chief ministers of several mineral-rich states wrote to the Prime Minister about low royalty realisations.
This comes at a time when the Centre is contemplating auctioning of mines, which will in effect take away the power of states to recommend mining grants for companies.
States have used this power to bargain with steel makers for huge investment commitments in lieu of mining licences. The Centre wants to take away this power as it feels it is unfair on states such as Bengal and Maharashtra, which may be short on mineral resources but have markets for finished steel or other key resources that steel makers use.
Besides, the process of auctioning mining rights will be more transparent and address local concerns over grants of mining licences being fraught with corruption.
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
10:34 PM
|
0 comments
Corruption plagues World Bank aided health projects in India-India-The Times of India
Corruption plagues World Bank aided health projects in India-India-The Times of India
Corruption plagues World Bank aided health projects in India
12 Jan 2008, 1239 hrs IST,PTI
Print Save EMail Write to Editor
NEW DELHI: World Bank has discovered serious cases of fraud and corruption in the five health sector projects dealing with eradication of tuberculosis and malaria and HIV/AIDS control schemes.
The probe into the five health projects has revealed unacceptable indicators of fraud and corruption, World Bank President Robert B Zoellick said in the statement.
These projects include USD 114 million Malaria Control Project, USD 82.1 million Orissa Health Systems Development Project, USD 54 million Food and Drug Capacity Building Project, USD 193.7 million Second National HIV/AIDS Control Project USD and 124.8 million Tuberculosis Control Project, it added.
The Indian government has promised to take "exemplary" action against those found guilty, it added.
The cases of frauds and corruption were discovered during the Detailed Implementation Review (DIR), which was launched by the bank in 2006, with support from Indian government.
The five projects were implemented between 1997 and 2003 with assistance from the Bank and other donors. Four of these projects have already been completed, while the fifth USD 54-million Food and Drug Capacity Building Project is ongoing, but the funds have not been disbursed for it yet.
This project will now be reviewed to incorporate the findings of the DIR, the World Bank statement said.
In an investigation in 2005, the World Bank had found cases of corruption in Reproductive and Child Health project, prompting the multi-lateral agency to withhold aid for the project for sometime. Subsequent to the probe, two pharma companies were also debarred by the Bank.
The current DIR was prompted by that investigation, the World Bank said.
Corruption plagues World Bank aided health projects in India
12 Jan 2008, 1239 hrs IST,PTI
Print Save EMail Write to Editor
NEW DELHI: World Bank has discovered serious cases of fraud and corruption in the five health sector projects dealing with eradication of tuberculosis and malaria and HIV/AIDS control schemes.
The probe into the five health projects has revealed unacceptable indicators of fraud and corruption, World Bank President Robert B Zoellick said in the statement.
These projects include USD 114 million Malaria Control Project, USD 82.1 million Orissa Health Systems Development Project, USD 54 million Food and Drug Capacity Building Project, USD 193.7 million Second National HIV/AIDS Control Project USD and 124.8 million Tuberculosis Control Project, it added.
The Indian government has promised to take "exemplary" action against those found guilty, it added.
The cases of frauds and corruption were discovered during the Detailed Implementation Review (DIR), which was launched by the bank in 2006, with support from Indian government.
The five projects were implemented between 1997 and 2003 with assistance from the Bank and other donors. Four of these projects have already been completed, while the fifth USD 54-million Food and Drug Capacity Building Project is ongoing, but the funds have not been disbursed for it yet.
This project will now be reviewed to incorporate the findings of the DIR, the World Bank statement said.
In an investigation in 2005, the World Bank had found cases of corruption in Reproductive and Child Health project, prompting the multi-lateral agency to withhold aid for the project for sometime. Subsequent to the probe, two pharma companies were also debarred by the Bank.
The current DIR was prompted by that investigation, the World Bank said.
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
8:25 PM
|
0 comments
CD has cash register ringing at IIT-India-The Times of India
CD has cash register ringing at IIT-India-The Times of India
CD has cash register ringing at IIT
18 Jan 2008, 0324 hrs IST,Hemali Chhapia,TNN
Print Save EMail Write to Editor
MUMBAI: When Indian Institute of Technology-Bombay kicked off its golden jubilee celebrations last year in September, ex-students — many of them abroad — received a package from their alma mater. It was a news capsule on the engineering college they had graduated from. Playing anchor was faculty member Deepak Phatak, who rattled off everything that had happened since they had graduated from the premier tech school.
For many, it evoked warm memories of a leafy campus where they had spent their best years. Along with the CD, the institute had also sent them details of the forthcoming celebrations and a donation form. It was like the perfect marketing pitch: the response was "phenomenal".
IIT-B has been snowed under with funds in the last five months. "Marketing cannot be connected to fund-raising, but the response from former students was exceptional," said professor Phatak, who is spearheading the golden jubilee celebrations.
His team had sent out almost 4,000 such packages to alumni in the US and 12,000 to former students across India. Apart from immediate donations, the phone calls too haven't stopped coming, many of them from people who have pledged for the future. "As part of golden jubilee celebrations, we want to raise Rs 100 crore for funds that we have set up for students, faculty, staff, institute and hostels," added Phatak.
To acknowledge each and every donor, the institute is building a 'Brick Wall of Fame'. The glass wall will have one lakh bricks, 30,000 for those who have passed out and 70,000 more, for students who will graduate in the years to come. Every donor of Rs 1 lakh will find his name on this wall.
"We will put up a plaque of every student who walks into the institute on this wall, and keep it turned the other way. When that student passes out and contributes to the institute, the plaque will be turned around to show his name," said Phatak.
This, he said, was being done to encourage "the culture of giving back" among students right from the outset. The institute has even set up a call centre and 40 students, after undergoing training, are involved in alumni networking and raising funds.
CD has cash register ringing at IIT
18 Jan 2008, 0324 hrs IST,Hemali Chhapia,TNN
Print Save EMail Write to Editor
MUMBAI: When Indian Institute of Technology-Bombay kicked off its golden jubilee celebrations last year in September, ex-students — many of them abroad — received a package from their alma mater. It was a news capsule on the engineering college they had graduated from. Playing anchor was faculty member Deepak Phatak, who rattled off everything that had happened since they had graduated from the premier tech school.
For many, it evoked warm memories of a leafy campus where they had spent their best years. Along with the CD, the institute had also sent them details of the forthcoming celebrations and a donation form. It was like the perfect marketing pitch: the response was "phenomenal".
IIT-B has been snowed under with funds in the last five months. "Marketing cannot be connected to fund-raising, but the response from former students was exceptional," said professor Phatak, who is spearheading the golden jubilee celebrations.
His team had sent out almost 4,000 such packages to alumni in the US and 12,000 to former students across India. Apart from immediate donations, the phone calls too haven't stopped coming, many of them from people who have pledged for the future. "As part of golden jubilee celebrations, we want to raise Rs 100 crore for funds that we have set up for students, faculty, staff, institute and hostels," added Phatak.
To acknowledge each and every donor, the institute is building a 'Brick Wall of Fame'. The glass wall will have one lakh bricks, 30,000 for those who have passed out and 70,000 more, for students who will graduate in the years to come. Every donor of Rs 1 lakh will find his name on this wall.
"We will put up a plaque of every student who walks into the institute on this wall, and keep it turned the other way. When that student passes out and contributes to the institute, the plaque will be turned around to show his name," said Phatak.
This, he said, was being done to encourage "the culture of giving back" among students right from the outset. The institute has even set up a call centre and 40 students, after undergoing training, are involved in alumni networking and raising funds.
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
8:23 PM
|
0 comments
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
BOG List - All chapter presidents are members.
OSA Chapter Office bearer list:
1. Maryland-Virginia Chapter: Lipi Nayak, lipishree@aol.com - Current link does not work (http://www.geocities.com/ssahoous/)-(301) 464-8860
2. NY/NJ Chapter: Lalatendu Mohanty - President lmohanty@yahoo.com -(http://www.osanynj.org) -908 704 1003
3. Washington DC Chapter: Leena Mishra, leena_mishra@ hotmail.com- ( www.osadc.org ) 301-610-2098 (H)- 301-841-4196 (W)- 301-910-8167 (Cell)
4. Chicago Chapter: Neelamadhababa Nanda, osachicago@yahoo.com -(Web site: None )(847) 271-8660
5. OZARK(Central) Chapter: Surya Misra, bablootiki@aol. com, - (Yet to Provide) Land: 636-273-3789, Cell: 636-448-8426
6. New England Chapter: Budhinath Padhi budhinath@yahoo.com - (Web site: Discontinued)-(508)393-9362
7. CanOSA Chapter: Amit Nayak, amitnayak71@ hotmail.com -www.canosa.ca - (905) 450-6074
8. Southwest Chapter: Tapan Padhi, tpadhi@yahoo.com - http://www.dfworiss a.org/ - (972) 712-6158
9. South East Chapter: Nileena Dash, nina@dashcorp.com -(http://members.tripod.com/~osa_se/)
10. South Chapter: Sarojini Mishra, dmisra@bellsouth.net - (Yet to provide)(256) 883-5499
11. Michigan Chapter: Jogesh Panda jogi_panda@yahoo. com - http://www.osamichigan.org/ - (734) 207-7936
12. Minnesota Chapter: Swapnakanta Mohanty, - smohanty@valspar.com-(Web site: None) (651) 3221710
13. Ohio Chapter: Birendra Jena, abjena@yahoo.com - (Web site: None)(330) 494-2618
1. Maryland-Virginia Chapter: Lipi Nayak, lipishree@aol.com - Current link does not work (http://www.geocities.com/ssahoous/)-(301) 464-8860
2. NY/NJ Chapter: Lalatendu Mohanty - President lmohanty@yahoo.com -(http://www.osanynj.org) -908 704 1003
3. Washington DC Chapter: Leena Mishra, leena_mishra@ hotmail.com- ( www.osadc.org ) 301-610-2098 (H)- 301-841-4196 (W)- 301-910-8167 (Cell)
4. Chicago Chapter: Neelamadhababa Nanda, osachicago@yahoo.com -(Web site: None )(847) 271-8660
5. OZARK(Central) Chapter: Surya Misra, bablootiki@aol. com, - (Yet to Provide) Land: 636-273-3789, Cell: 636-448-8426
6. New England Chapter: Budhinath Padhi budhinath@yahoo.com - (Web site: Discontinued)-(508)393-9362
7. CanOSA Chapter: Amit Nayak, amitnayak71@ hotmail.com -www.canosa.ca - (905) 450-6074
8. Southwest Chapter: Tapan Padhi, tpadhi@yahoo.com - http://www.dfworiss a.org/ - (972) 712-6158
9. South East Chapter: Nileena Dash, nina@dashcorp.com -(http://members.tripod.com/~osa_se/)
10. South Chapter: Sarojini Mishra, dmisra@bellsouth.net - (Yet to provide)(256) 883-5499
11. Michigan Chapter: Jogesh Panda jogi_panda@yahoo. com - http://www.osamichigan.org/ - (734) 207-7936
12. Minnesota Chapter: Swapnakanta Mohanty, - smohanty@valspar.com-(Web site: None) (651) 3221710
13. Ohio Chapter: Birendra Jena, abjena@yahoo.com - (Web site: None)(330) 494-2618
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
11:21 PM
|
0 comments
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Original_OSA_Status_Prior_1981.pdf (application/pdf Object)
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
4:04 AM
|
0 comments
OSA_501c3_Status_Used_For_Financial_trans.pdf (application/pdf Object)
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
3:52 AM
|
0 comments
OSANYNJ_membership_form.pdf (application/pdf Object)
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
12:45 AM
|
0 comments
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Losing an Edge, Japanese Envy India’s Schools - New York Times
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
10:31 PM
|
0 comments
China for long-term contract on iron-ore - Metals News - Metals Place
China for long-term contract on iron-ore - Metals News - Metals Place
China has expressed its keenness to enter into a long-term iron-ore supply contracts with Indian suppliers in a bid to offset soaring prices of the mineral caused by rising ocean freight and surging oil prices.
“Beijing will make efforts to establish a long-term iron-ore supply contracts with Indian suppliers in a bid to restrict soaring iron ore prices,” Metal Bulletin reported quoting China Iron and Steel Association (CISA) secretary general, Mr Luo Bingsheng.
The immediate factor pushing up the price of imported iron ore is the abnormal hike in ocean freight on spot iron ore trading caused by surging oil prices and US dollar depreciation, he said, and pointed out that Indian iron ore has led the way in this regard.
“We should introduce a long-term contracts for the importers (of Indian ore) as well as enhance the threshold for qualified importers,” Mr Bingsheng said.
The import price (including cost insurance and freight) of iron ore being shipped from India hit $135.19 per ton in October, up by $68.33 per ton, compared with $66.86 a ton seen in January this year.
“The price has since touched $200 per ton before slipping back to $180-185,” Metal Bulletin said.
The Chinese government is considering changing the way iron ore is imported in an effort to squeeze ore imports from India. – Press Trust of India
China has expressed its keenness to enter into a long-term iron-ore supply contracts with Indian suppliers in a bid to offset soaring prices of the mineral caused by rising ocean freight and surging oil prices.
“Beijing will make efforts to establish a long-term iron-ore supply contracts with Indian suppliers in a bid to restrict soaring iron ore prices,” Metal Bulletin reported quoting China Iron and Steel Association (CISA) secretary general, Mr Luo Bingsheng.
The immediate factor pushing up the price of imported iron ore is the abnormal hike in ocean freight on spot iron ore trading caused by surging oil prices and US dollar depreciation, he said, and pointed out that Indian iron ore has led the way in this regard.
“We should introduce a long-term contracts for the importers (of Indian ore) as well as enhance the threshold for qualified importers,” Mr Bingsheng said.
The import price (including cost insurance and freight) of iron ore being shipped from India hit $135.19 per ton in October, up by $68.33 per ton, compared with $66.86 a ton seen in January this year.
“The price has since touched $200 per ton before slipping back to $180-185,” Metal Bulletin said.
The Chinese government is considering changing the way iron ore is imported in an effort to squeeze ore imports from India. – Press Trust of India
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
11:52 AM
|
0 comments
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Metro | New Year upgrade gift for Besu... and Buddha
posted by Sandip K. Dasverma at
3:03 AM
|
0 comments
