【出版时间及名称】：2010年4月欧洲金属与矿产行业研究报告
        【作者】：汇丰银行
        【文件格式】：pdf
        【页数】：24
        【目录或简介】：
We continue to see more value in Rio
Tinto (OW(V)) than BHP Billiton (N(V))
 We believe the iron ore JV may fail
regulatory approval, and this could be a
trigger for revisiting a full merger
 This would require iron ore divestments
while extracting synergies – we believe
this is workable
Time to revisit plan A
The scenario we explore in this research piece (and it is just that
– there are no indications from either BHP Billiton (BHP) or
Rio Tinto (RIO) that a larger transaction is being contemplated)
is that the iron ore joint venture in Australia is likely to fail
regulatory approval, and this will be a catalyst for BHP to
revisit the acquisition of RIO and the divestment of the nonsynergistic
parts of their combined iron ore businesses.
Our analysis indicates that of the 360Mt of combined iron
ore capacity in the Pilbara, 240Mt is geographically close
enough to be associated with synergistic production hubs.
Forming a separate entity for divestment of non-synergy
tonnes may be complex, but the market appetite for such an
entity would be far greater now than when the original deal
was abandoned at the end of 2008.
We pose the question: If BHP believed that the acquisition of
RIO was a good proposition when RIO had USD40bn of debt
and downstream aluminium assets, why would it not now?
Many of the benefits claimed are still available, and a
transaction under the original terms (adjusted for RIO’s rights
issue this is 2.2 BHP shares per RIO, a 27% premium to the
current RIO price) looks accretive and workable. The strategic
rationale for the original deal in our view is as strong as it was
in 2007/8 and the path through antitrust for a full merger is
known and now workable through selective divestment.
What do you do with the stocks? Independent of any revival
of merger, we prefer RIO (OW(V) target price GBP48) to
BHP (N(V), target price GBP23).