Seeking Alpha
We cover over 5K calls/quarter
Profile| Send Message|
( followers)  

Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. (NYSE:ANR)

Q4 2012 Earnings Conference Call

February 14, 2013 10:00 ET

Executives

Todd Allen - VP, IR

Kevin Crutchfield - CEO

Frank Wood - EVP and CFO

Paul Vining - EVP & Chief Commercial Officer

Analysts

Mitesh Thakkar - FBR

Andre Benjamin - Goldman, Sachs & Co

Evan Kurtz - Morgan Stanley

Jim Rollyson - Raymond James

Caleb Dorfman - Simmons & Company

Curt Woodworth - Nomura Securities

Michael Dudas - Sterne, Agee

David Gagliano - Barclays Capital

Chris Haberlin – Davenport

Operator

Greetings, and welcome to the Alpha Natural Resources Fourth Quarter 2012 Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded.

It is now my pleasure to introduce your host, Mr. Todd Allen, Vice President of Investor Relations for Alpha Natural Resources. Thank you, Mr. Allen. You may now begin.

Todd Allen

Thank you and thank you everyone for participating in today's Alpha Natural Resources fourth quarter 2012 earnings conference call. Joining me on the call today are Kevin Crutchfield, Alpha Natural Resources' Chairman and CEO, who will provide a brief market outlook and summarize our fourth quarter results; Frank Wood, our CFO, who will comment on Alpha's financial results and updated guidance; and Paul Vining, Alpha's President who will be available to address operational and marketing questions following our prepared remarks.

Before we begin, I wanted to mention that Alpha's management team will be meeting with investors at several upcoming conferences, including the JPMorgan High Yield and Leverage Finance Conference in Miami on February 25. The most 22nd Global Metals and Mining Conference in Hollywood, Florida the next day on the 26th. The Simmons And Company 12th Annual Energy Conference on the 28th, Howard Weil’s 41st Annual Energy Conference in New Orleans on March 20th and Barclays Americas Mining and Materials Forum in New York on March 21st. Please let me remind you that various remarks that we make on this call concerning future expectations for the Company constitute forward-looking statements under the Safe Harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are made on the basis of management's views and assumptions regarding future events and business performance as of the time the statements are made. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied. Information concerning factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements are contained in our filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequently filed Form 10-Qs.

This call is being recorded and will be available for replay for a period of two weeks. The call can also be heard live on the Internet and both the replay and a downloadable podcast of the event will be archived on our website at alphanr.com for a period of three months.

And with that, I'll turn it over to Kevin.

Kevin Crutchfield

Thanks Todd and good morning everybody. Alpha once again improved its safety performance during 2012. In addition to a 20% reduction in recordable incident and a 23% reduction in violations from specter day, I wanted to highlight a couple of our operations for their outstanding commitment to working safely. The Brooks Run, Cumberland Mine and the power for this plant have operated for more than five years without a single loss time accident.

We want to thank and congratulate the folks of both of these operations along with all of our employees for their continued vigilance and ongoing dedication to running mine. It's important to remember that improvement is good and something we always strive for but the goal when it comes to safety is nothing short of perfection. The expectation can be no less; the loss of three members of the Alpha family in 2012 underscores the need to fully dedicate our best thinking and execution to obtain the goal of perfection and safety every day.

This past quarter was a pivotal one for Alpha and concluded a year in which we made tremendous strides across our key priorities. Strategic, operational and financial, the restructuring initiative announced in September is largely complete and is expected to eliminate over a $150 million in overhead cost. These actions position Alpha for a long term success and ensure that our operations and cost base are perfectly aligned with the current market environment. I’m pleased to report with Alpha delivered strong fourth quarter results reflecting our focus on lowering our overall cost base.

We generated full revenues of 1.4 billion and adjusted EBITDA of 217 million during the quarter compared with coal revenue of 1.5 billion an adjusted EBITDA of 179 million in the third quarter of 2012. The strong EBITDA for payments in the fourth quarter dispute lower revenues when compared to the prior quarter reflects decreased unit cost and the ease and continuing low unit cost in the PRB was more than offset lower shipments of Eastern steam and PRB coals and lower average realizations for both metallurgical and eastern steam coals.

Following our recent restructuring actions we now expect to be able to hold the line on our cost of coal sales per ton for the full year 2013 and our goal is to slightly reduce full year cost return in the east. But while we expect good cost performance in the seven year its worth mentioning that we do not believe that due to exceptional cost performance reported in the fourth quarter is sustainable due to certain year in impacts that Frank will discuss with you shortly.

Turning to the overall market environment, markets for both lead and steam coal weaken throughout much of 2012, but the reasons for the weakness in the prospects for near-term recovery differ both by product type and by product region.

Weakness in the met market during 2012 resulted from a combination of slowing Chinese demand growth, slumping demand in parts of Europe due to the ongoing economic malaise, and the recovery of Australian supply, all culminating in a generally oversupplied situation. However, we are seeing some important early signs of strengthening. Since the bottoming with spot prices reported in the low 140s per metric ton late in the third quarter, the Asian market has strengthened as a result of reacceleration of Chinese manufacturing activity, steel restocking efforts, and record high Chinese coking coal imports in December.

In addition, the Australian rain season has begun to impact supply with lengthening vessel cues and railroad disruptions in the wake of Oswald still minor compared to the impacts we saw in 2011. As a result, recent swap deals in Asia are reportedly $5 to $10 above the global benchmark of $165 per metric ton with report related to this morning with even higher numbers.

Pricing in the Atlantic market remains somewhat disconnected from what we are seeing in Asia due no doubt to the fiscal cloud that lingers over the Eurozone. Still the fact that 30 plus million tons of met coal supply has been out of globally, and the current pricing is insufficient to sustaining the large portion of the remaining global production base. These raised the odds that better times lie ahead. And those odds increased further if growing Asian economy start to consume a larger portion of a smaller natural supply base.

The situation for domestic steam coal varies by production basin that can generally be characterized by persistent weakness. At the end of the year, domestic utility inventory stood at approximately 197 million tons or roughly 87 days of burn, up from 186 million tons at the end of 2011 or 64 days of burn from year ago. Stockpiles were down from their peak in the spring of 2012, but they are still high despite the fact that coal production fell approximately 80 million tons in the year 2012. It’s our belief that unless inventories drop appreciably driven by further production cuts or increased coal demand, our gas prices blow through the $4 mark or both.

The U.S. coal market for thermal coals will remain uninspiring for the foreseeable future. In light of significant decrease in domestic coal consumption in 2012, producers, utilities, and traders ramped up exports. 2012 looks to be a record year for exports with volumes estimated at approximately 125 million tons, including approximately 60 million tons of steam coal, up sharply from 37 million tons in 2011. The motivations behind the rapid increase of steam coal exports are now clear and had the predictable effect of weighing heavily on seaborne prices.

With current API steel price under $90 per metric ton, most Central App thermal coal was currently out of the money, but other thermal coals including our Pittsburgh 8 coals will be able to play in the export market both now and into the future. In light of seaborne pricing, most analysts are predicting that export volumes will contract somewhat in 2013.

While inventories are elevated in all regions, we continued to believe that the challenges in the PRB and in Northern App are mainly cyclical and driven by very low gas prices and the related impact of mild weather in 2012. Utilities served by these basins will eventually work through the inventory overhang, lower gas prices around the $4 mark suggest that U.S. coal consumption can increase by several tens of millions of tons in 2013. And producers in these basins can expect to generate acceptable margins over the long-term.

On the other hand in the regions served by Central App coal, where $4 gas is cost advantaged and coal plant retirement announcements have been widespread, the sharp reduction in coal consumption appears to be more structural. Central App utility stockpiles have remained fairly constant in tonnage terms, but days of burn at year end were roughly two times normal at 150 days. In other words, consumption of Central App coals has been roughly 7.5. We believe that driving a secular decline in coal consumption has been lowered by high cost production in Central Appalachia as evidenced by the year-over-year production decrease of roughly 30 million tons.

In response to these changing market conditions Alpha has repositioned itself through proactive and extensive restructuring initiatives. Compared to the Central App Thermal Coal footprint Alpha had immediately following the acquisition of Massey. We have reduced our production by roughly 50%, and closing high cost product mines and mines producing coals for which there is limited or shrinking demand. We have pared back production at our PRB mines by approximately 20% in the near term to a level that will allow us to ship only those tons priced at a level that will provide Alpha a reasonable margin. As for the near term market it represents fair value we intently the tons in the ground for a better day. We have flattened and streamlined our organizations and we have implemented overhead cost reduction initiatives that are expected to eliminate a $150 million of annualized cost. These cost savings are already beginning to have an impact and will be fully in place by the back half of 2013.

We continue to focus on our highest margin metallurgical coal business while idling production and some lower quality production that is currently commanding pricing that we believe does not represent appropriate value. When conditions in the met market warrant, it's important to note that we have preserved the ability to ramp up our metallurgical shipments back to the mid-20 million ton level annually, a level I might add we have achieved in the past. Also we move swiftly to grow our export thermal coal business which more than doubled to nearly 6 million tons in 2012 and when seaborne prices reflect fair value we have the ability to materially increase our thermal coal exports in 2013 and the years ahead. We shift an additional 4 million plus tons on OTC contracts that can be clearly traced to the export market. So the total Alpha tons that moved on the export thermal market amounted to something in excess of 10 million tons in 2012 which amounts to greater than 20% of the US East Coast and Gulf of Mexico exports for the year.

These tons shipped on the OTC market involved touching a series of non-producers and non-users which reduced the margin available for Alpha, going forward as both Paul and I have highlighted in the past, our plan is to shift as much volume as we can directly to international customers and by extension away from the OTC market with the aim of maximizing our margins and building durable relationships with global.

In short we moved early and decisively last year in anticipation of the new business reality for coal. We optimized our thermal production, realized sales and marketing recapture direct sales opportunities abroad and reduced overhead consistent with the smaller production footprint and we have the third largest metallurgical coal franchise in the world that remains positioned for a rebound. We will continue to excess market conditions as they evolve and we stand ready to take any additional actions to maintain our competitive advantage. With that I will now turn the call over Frank for discussion of our financial results and 2013 guidance. Frank?

Frank Wood

Thank you Kevin. Good morning everyone, coal revenues during the fourth quarter of 2012 were 1.4 billion versus 1.8 billion in the fourth quarter of 2011. The year-over-year decrease was primarily due to lower shipment volumes across all of our coal products and lower average per ton realizations for metallurgical coal. During the quarter shipments in metallurgical coal were 4.9 million tons down 7%, eastern steam coal shipments were 9.4 million tons, a decrease of 21% and PRB shipments were 11.6 million tons drop of 17% year-over-year. The average realization per ton for met coal was a $121.27 down from 156.49 in the fourth quarter of 2011.

These items are partially offset by higher average realizations from the PRB which were $13 per ton in the current quarter compared to 11.96 last year. Eastern steam coal realizations were 64.55 compared to a 66.93 last year. Total cost expenses were approximately 1.6 billion in the fourth quarter a decrease of 44% from the 2.9 billion last year and excluding impairment and restructuring charges in both periods total cost expenses were 1.4 billion in the current quarter compared with 2.1 billion in the fourth quarter of 2011.

Fourth quarter cost of coal sales was 0.9 billion compared to 1.6 billion in the fourth quarter last year. Excluding the impact of changes in the asset retirement obligations in closed mines, which resulted in the benefit of approximately $154 million, reversal of some benefit related accruals that resulted in the benefit of approximately $42 million, roughly $6 million of pre-tax UBB expense and a negligible amount of merger-related expense, including our fourth quarter cost of coal sales. Alpha’s adjusted cost of coal sales in the East was $58.55 per ton compared with $78.57 in the year ago quarter and $75.93 in the third quarter.

As Kevin mentioned, our fourth adjusted cost of coal sales in the East were exceptionally low due to a number of factors, almost all of which moved in the direction of decreasing costs and increasing coal margins. Based on our recent restructuring and cost control initiatives, we are confident that we can hold the line on costs that may be able to lower full year cost of coal sales in the East moderately, but we do not expect that the unit cost reported in the fourth quarter can be sustained.

The year-over-year decrease in adjusted cost of coal sales per ton in the East is a result of a host of variables, including the elimination of a significant amount of relatively high cost Central App thermal coal production, a mix shift with a greater proportional contribution from the lower cost Pittsburgh 8 Seam longwalls, which had a very strong year end cost performance in the mid-30s per ton in the fourth quarter. Lower variable cost as met coal realizations have decreased. Fewer and lower cost purchase coal volumes and several normal course of business expense adjustments and benefits has lowered adjusted cost by approximately $2.50 per ton somewhat offset by a greater proportional contribution from a high cost met coal and fixed cost spread over, spread across fewer tons.

The adjusted cost of coal sales in the PRB during the fourth quarter was $9.43 per ton compared to $9.44 in the year ago period and $9.40 in the third quarter of 2012. As you have seen in our release, Alpha reported a fourth quarter 2012 net loss of $128 million or $0.58 per diluted share compared to the net loss of $793 million or $3.62 per diluted share in the fourth quarter of 2011.

Our fourth quarter net loss reflects various items that are detailed in our press release including the aforementioned estimate change for asset retirement obligations, the impact of benefits related accrual reversal, UBB and merger-related expenses, as well as $228 million pre-tax of impairment and restructuring charges, and various other adjustments. Excluding these items, Alpha’s fourth quarter 2012 adjusted net loss was $41 million or $0.19 per diluted share. Adjusted EBITDA, which excludes many of these same items and is also detailed in our fourth quarter release was $217 million compared with $161 million in the fourth quarter last year.

During the fourth quarter, cash flow from operations was approximately $213 million, up from $149 million in the year ago period. And capital expenditures were approximately $70 million down significantly from $214 million in the year ago period. Due to our strong operating cash flows and constrained capital expenditures during the fourth quarter of 2012, Alpha generated free cash flow of approximately $100 million in the quarter.

Turning to the guidance for 2013, as of the January 25th measurement date, Alpha expects to ship between 81 million and 92 million tons of coal, including between 19 million and 22 million tons of metallurgical coal between 25 million and 30 million tons of Eastern steam coal and between 37 million and 40 million tons of Western PRB coal. As of January 25th based on the midpoint of these expected shipment ranges, Alpha has 47% of its met coal committed and priced at average per ton realizations of $113.25 and another 33% committed and un-priced. We have 94% of our Eastern steam coal committed and priced at average per ton realizations of $62.71 and 2% committed and un-priced. And in the West, we have 97% of our PRB coal committed and priced at average realizations of $12.84 per ton. In full year 2013, we anticipate that Eastern and Western cost of coal sales will be in the range of $71 to $75 per ton and $10 to $11 per ton respectively.

Our selling, general and administrative expenses are expected to be within a range of $140 million to $160 million. We expect depreciation, depletion, and amortization to be between 875 and 975 million, an interest expense is projected to be between 230 and 240 million. We have substantially reduced our plant capture expenditures for year 2013 to arrange to 350 million compared to 402 million spend in the year 2012 and 529 million spend in 2011. Also during 2013 we expect cash outflows of 48 million to fund the industry safety trust fund to establish one of the non-prosecution agreements. These expected cash outflows reduce the recorded balance sheet liability and will reduce cash provided by operating activities. Alpha’s total liquidity at the end of the fourth quarter stood at approximately 2.05 billion including cash, cash equivalent of marketable securities and approximately 1.03 billion in addition to approximately 1.02 billion available under the company’s various secured credit facilities.

As Kevin discussed we have taken decisive actions to right size our mine portfolio. We have restructured organization with the expectation of eliminating a $150 million of annual overhead cost as a process. We have adjusted our capital structure and increased our liquidity and financial flexibility. As of today we have largely completed the implementation of our repositioning plan which will facilitate our long term success. And with that operator will you now open the call for questions.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions). Thank you. Our first question comes from the line of Mitesh Thakkar with FBR. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Mitesh Thakkar – FBR

Good performance on the cost side and can you walk us through some of the moving parts, how much of this is driven by just idling the high cost thermal mines and how much of this is squeezing the supply cost and labor is kind of little bit fixed component, can you talk about it a little bit, as a bucket from where this cost 2013 cost guidance compared to ’12?

Kevin Crutchfield

Let’s just start from the adjusted cost of coal sales were in the east fourth quarter of 68.55 and kind of walk you into the guidance range of $71 to $75 per ton. The first thing as I mentioned in the script a moment ago, the fourth quarter 2012 contained about $2.50 per ton of normal course of business expense adjustments and benefits which won't recur every quarter and effectively some of those are the kind of things that typically will occur in the fourth quarter, sometimes they go in a positive direction, sometimes they may go in a negative direction. This time predominantly they had the effective reducing cost. So if we take that 68.55 add in roughly $2.50 you have got $71 to start with.

The second significant factor that we had in the quarter that was beneficial to us was the fact that the Northern Appalachian longwall performed extremely well. They had cost that were roughly in the mid-30s for the quarter which actually gave us the margin of that $24 a ton or about 40%. That’s not going to happen quarter after quarter, I mean we think we’re going to have good performance from the longwall in 2013 and we built that into the guidance but we don’t expect it to be mid-$30 cost consistently from those machine. So I would estimate that that gives you another $1 to maybe a $1.50 of kind of benefit in the quarter that probably isn’t going to be there quarter after quarter in the guidance. Other than that most of the rest of it as we look, so if we get up to let’s say in the range of $72 to $72.50 most of the rest of what we have got built into the guidance really is the fact that when you look at the average quarter in 2013 that we expect out of the East above 12 million tons, that’s actually about 16% less volume than what we did in the fourth quarter. So, we are going to have something effective 2013 by spreading fixed cost over less tons which we think will put cost up, but basically we go back and compare to prior quarters which were in the more to the mid and even in some cases high 70s, a lot of the improvement that we have seen, that we have baked into the guidance is due to the cost containment efforts, is due to the sourcing initiatives, maintenance initiatives, restructuring that we have done, all those things have amounted now to what I would say our multiple dollars per ton and we do anticipate offsetting inflationary increases in ‘13 with additional some of those benefits as we work them through.

Paul Vining

There is another aspect to the cost to this, probably worth mentioning too, Frank talked about this, it could put upward pressure on cost. One thing that we will have the potential to put downward pressure on cost as well as we have continued to idle the properties. There are costs associated with these. And what we have done is put together a group of very good managers to highlight what those opportunities are. And even though we are not going to report it separately, we are reporting it separately internally to bring the kind of focus and rigor, a rigor that we need to around minimizing this tail going forward. So, we believe that represents a fair amount of potential to bring cost downward going forward.

Mitesh Thakkar - FBR

Great. So, when you look at your portfolio how should we think about costs on the thermal portfolio versus the met portfolio, I know you said NAP is about mid-30s?

Kevin Crutchfield

Yeah. I mean, look with respect to Northern App I mean we have seen cost anywhere from the low to mid 30s all the way into the mid-40s and it’s a function of when longwall moves occur and what sort of conditions they are in. The fourth quarter was a very good quarter. They have mined about 2.8 million tons generated. As Frank mentioned, its $24 margin and about 40% operating margin. So, it was a very good quarter now, hats off to the Pennsylvania Group for roll out. But as Frank mentioned with the passage economy that you are going to have moves from time to time, so you can’t count on that quarter-in, quarter-out. And as we have discussed before, the cost structure of our Eastern thermal properties versus the met properties that there is a wide range that some of the met properties will exceed $100 cost, but the good news is that some of the better coals too. So, we remain focused on margins and we believe when the met market responds and we think it will, that those properties are well situated. Where we are going to continue to focus is keeping a very close eye on the thermal properties and what we dispatch here in the United States as well as what we can get offshore that makes sense on a sustainable durable basis going forward.

Mitesh Thakkar - FBR

Great.

Kevin Crutchfield

Thanks Mitesh.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Andre Benjamin with Goldman Sachs. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Andre Benjamin - Goldman Sachs

Thanks. Good morning.

Kevin Crutchfield

Hi, Andre.

Andre Benjamin - Goldman Sachs

First question, you have pretty materially cut your Eastern thermal volumes for ‘13, I think what the midpoint is something like the 15 million tons versus 2012 levels, was this driven more by a demand view or it’s something that you’ve kind of uncovered over the last couple of months in your cost containment measures being that you took it down even further versus your guidance three months ago? And could those tons come back if you were to see gas, they would transform for 50 for some time or is this just going to stay at this kind of level?

Paul Vining

Yeah, this is Paul Vining. I think the range for Central App thermal that cribs out of the guidance is 15 million to 20 million tons or thereabouts.

Andre Benjamin - Goldman Sachs

Right.

Paul Vining

And we have got to cut back from last year for several reasons, one is taking some of the higher cost operations out, but secondarily, the obvious shift in the contraction in terms of the domestic demand for Central App thermal coal will offset by some of the initiatives we got going on, on the export side shifting the quality in the portfolio to somewhat lower BTU lower cost products that shift the API 2 market. So, it’s combination of factors really and again going back to Kevin’s comment, it’s about margin start building a profitable platform in Central App is a basin from a thermal standpoint. It’s going to be shifting more ton overtime into the export market and the domestic market is going to continue to contract a little bit here in the next few years.

Kevin Crutchfield

We will retain some level of elasticity for a while if we continue to run the excess at this pace so we will be into lieu some of that elasticity going forward of this can more expecting more difficult to start these operations back there, so it's okay to characterize it as you know number one we were dealing with the realities we were seeing at that time and then number two we were trying to think ahead and began anticipating what 2013 and then suing years were going to hold and that’s why we took a notch from there and made the conscious decision to leave some tons in the ground and if the market conditions warrant we can re-dispatch, if they say no we’re already ahead of curve.

Andre Benjamin - Goldman, Sachs & Co

Great and then you’re just on the pretty big restructuring, I’m wondering would you ever consider maybe taking some more significant steps to maybe further reduce leverage on our hands flexibility and would you ever consider selling some cap thermal in that reserves that you’re trying not to going to mine for the next 15-20 years and similarly how strategically important do you view your western thermal business?

Kevin Crutchfield

Several questions in there, I mean I guess to the question of would we sell assets and if we can achieve a value again a transaction that we think is more valuable to us than absolutely we’re in love with none of the assets and we got to be disciplined I guess what I would overlay that with is one good question at the timing of whether now is an appropriate time to undertake such an endeavor, it's our view that it's slightly not because that’s something that we continue to think about internally and access and with respect to the Powder River Basin hats off that team out there as well that come from nice back to back quarters in terms of growing their cost especially in a volume market that’s been going the other way. So they have done a good job of managing that and they will be a big part of profitability this year so I think we believe still continue to believe long term in the fundamentals of the Power River Basin but what we have decided to do here in the near term is at least sometimes in the ground until we can we believe that the market place reflects what we believe to deter value, so we make very conscious decisions to scale back and we will continue with that (inaudible) until we see more positive signs on the market front.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Evan Kurtz with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Evan Kurtz - Morgan Stanley

Firstly the question on your metallurgical coal guidance, I think the mid-point for 2013 is pretty similar to what you actually did in 2012 and I know you said that you were going to cut about 10% of your production back in September so just trying to figure out them what you’re kind of thinking was implied in the guidance as far as minor restarts.

Kevin Crutchfield

I will take a look at what we produced and shipped in the fourth quarter which was just under 20 million ton run-rate and applied to 2013 and that’s not too far off what we’re guiding for ’13 in terms of mid-point. So maybe action, any action we were taking relative to the production footprint on the met side have already been undertaken and we’re in process during 2012.

Evan Kurtz - Morgan Stanley

And maybe just a follow-up on that, what sort of met coal price would you need to see to begin to maybe ramp that up and put some numbers up that are higher than 20.5 or towards the higher end of the range?

Kevin Crutchfield

I think it all depends as always on the quality and the what you’re going to bring online and how are you going to bring it online and shifts in Saturday’s is the easy parts and that’s some incremental benefit, we actually are reopening the mine and hiring additional people, there is a little bit more ramp up and requires a little more clarity around those sustainability to those prices and I think that’s one of the keys when it comes to creating expectations about bigger volumes is it a short blip or is it surely sustainable. So, you know a little bump in that benchmark and increased pricing in that 15, 20, $25 will certainly go a long ways to providing that sort of transparency and visibility?

Evan Kurtz - Morgan Stanley

Okay, thanks. That’s helpful. I will turn it over.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Justine Fisher with Goldman Sachs. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Justine Fisher - Goldman Sachs

Good morning.

Kevin Crutchfield

Hi, Justine.

Justine Fisher - Goldman Sachs

I just got a question on the pricing of export kind of denotes that from what we have been hearing in the markets, companies have been exporting coal even if it’s at a loss either because they want to maintain a market share in the export market or because they have some contracts that they have to fulfill that are take or pay etcetera. Is this something that you guys have done, i.e., export at a loss just to maintain share, because you needed to? And is this something that you would do in 2013?

Paul Vining

This is Paul Vining. So, you are asking me to acknowledge we sell coal and lose money, is that…

Justine Fisher - Goldman Sachs

Other companies have done it, other companies have acknowledged that.

Paul Vining

Listen, I’ll answer it this way that the thermal market is a commodity market. We are not in the business of selling coal and losing money. On the export metallurgical market, more focused. We are selling the chemical feedstock into a blend for chemical process. And when you drop out of a customers’ blend unlike a thermal customer, you are not going to knocking it on the door, the next month or the next quarter and get right back in. In fact, you are standing on the sidelines. So, I will answer it in terms of there are times when you have to what I will say make an investment to hang in there with a customer, particularly the good ones in a bad time, and continue to ship and continue to do business knowing that you’ve hit a bottom and it’s going to bounce in the quarter. You really don’t have the option to just walking away for 90 days. So, it’s there are practical decisions and strategic decisions, but we are all focused on margins and we are not going to hang in to a market that we see is a loser or that’s not likely to provide a high degree of profitability in the future.

Kevin Crutchfield

The other thing I would add to that too, Justin, this is Kevin, on the export thermal side, part of this is creating a new platform for our sales as we have a shrinking marketplace here in the United States. How much of what we do in the East, we can translate into profitable business long-term offshore, because as you know we have the infrastructure to be able to do that and some of this too is a function of historically U.S. markets have been 12,000 to 12,500 BTUs and the global markets are more desirous of a lower calorific value, because what they want is cheaper material. And the long-term impacts to our cost structure are still yet unknown in terms of well, how much our cost will be reduced by playing in that market where it can generate little higher ash or little lower calorific value. So, part of that is a bit of a discovery process of the tallest point if that’s what it takes to establish out of the footprint in a reputational situation as well as some market share. Yeah, we have been willing to endure a little bit of pain in the near-term, but certainly not on the sustainable basis, because in our view the markets got to reflect their value, otherwise we’re just (inaudible).

Justine Fisher - Goldman Sachs

Okay, alright. Thanks. And then my follow-up was just on the CapEx number, we may have discussed this before, but it seems to be if we could use kind of, I guess, $1 or a little more than that per ton in the PRB and maybe $5 or a little more than that in the East for maintenance CapEx, it looks like $300 million to $350 million is a pretty barebones number. Do you think that’s sustainable for ‘14 and ‘15 in addition to ‘13 and that it could be given that you have set down a lot of your higher cost lines, I was just wondering if that – if you think you can maintain a CapEx level that low for the next few years and whether that’s going to have some upward pressure in ‘14 and ‘15?

Frank Wood

I mean, look here is what we tell you is number one, we are not going to do anything to impair the viability of the assets going forward. So, in other words, it’s not going to be a period of two years from now and we’ll look at and say oh, my gosh, we have got this huge cash capital from the number. The other thing that I think is important to recall to and we talked about this a little bit in the past is we have a lot of equipment that has been freed up through these idling’s and restructurings and shutdowns. They were feeding right into the pipeline that is otherwise causing us to just not have to go by capital. So, that will feed the pipeline for pretty nicely actually for at least the next couple if not three years. So – and we probably owe the investment community a little bit of transparency on exactly what that means and we will do that. So, that’s the other thing that’s influencing it, but I think the thing I would like to leave you with is we are not doing anything that’s going to impair the viability of the asset going forward.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Jim Rollyson with Raymond James. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Jim Rollyson - Raymond James

Kevin just going back to just the questions on exports, when you think about what you’re seeing this year and where prices are and everything, obviously you’re focus in the long run is to continue to emphasis exports as a growth platform. Kind of curious what your thoughts are on what volumes you think you will export this year and maybe how you think about the overall U.S. market in terms of exports in 2013 versus ’12.

Kevin Crutchfield

I’m not sure I want to peg a number this early in the year, what I will say is we got about 3.5, 3.6 million tons committed already, export, thermal exports that excludes the met obviously and our general sense is that you will see probably decline in the export thermal market this year out of the U.S. for all of the reasons that we talked about before principally. You know what we saw was a big sort of dumping set of activities last year associated with you know the epiphany around cash and switching and that sort of thing but the thing seems have to stabilized a little bit. Now so I think what we would expect is a moderation in the amount of thermal exports and maybe some slight decrease in met but not depreciable, did that answer your question? Was that you were looking for?

Jim Rollyson - Raymond James

Yes that’s helpful and just on the when you go through the math or your guidance for overall eastern thermal tons this year of 25 to 30 and you have kind of back out the Northern App 9 to 10, you’re somewhere in the 16 to 20 range for Central App thermal production which if I’m not mistaken you have mentioned half it's at the low ends either below half of kind of where you guys would have been combined with Massey back in 2011. Do you think you’re at a level now that is a sustainable in the future type of run-rate given you know assuming a gas market that’s not going back to what it used to be or do you think you need some improvement in gas prices to kind of sustain in this 16 to 20 type of rates for Central App Thermal?

Kevin Crutchfield

I think based on what, the way we read the (inaudible) it's certainly close. We believe that we put in place a thoughtful repositioning plan and that we have largely turned the corner but that doesn’t mean that we have, don’t have some work to do around the margins but I think as we pointed before to a new sort of look at notional clearing prices for the various basins in the United States I mean we’re still at a point where I don’t know, there is 2/3rds of U.S. production basis is underwater relative to the notional clearing price. So that stuff is got to change and that’s clear to a non-sustainable loan term thing and our view at least for the near term is gas probably is range bound for a while but longer term you have got as yourself question to about what fair value for gas and you look at all capital is been deployed into poking holes in the earth’s crust, this thing has to get a little bit synchronized longer term but I think in the term that yeah we feel pretty interested.

We have taken the right steps and it's at least close, we may have to work on it more around the margins but in the near term we feel good about the steps we taken.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Caleb Dorfman with Simmons & Company. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Caleb Dorfman - Simmons & Company

I guess first off what comes back to the net market, what sort of demand signal are you seeing from your customers, obviously you talked about as Atlantic Basin market is a little weaker, are you looking at getting more involved in the Pacific basin market? Maybe you have seen the differentials that you’re being forced to take into that market change a little bit?

Paul Vining

Obviously Europe is a sort of a mix bag, we have got some bright spots and some that are still you know little bit under the contingent in terms of both demand and pricing. We have been fairly active in the Pacific realm and the Asian markets all along, I won't say that we have increased our focus. We’re certainly shipping fairly large tonnage into India and Korea and some into Japan and those are the logical places. I would say the spreads between our landed price and the Australian landed price we’re starting to narrow pretty significantly and in part that’s due to the fact that the Australian pricing has bounced off some pretty miserable lows here several months ago in the 140s. So, the news this morning is pretty clear that it’s at least on the hard coking coal benchmark well into the 170s. And we typically follow that and we are starting to the signs, but we are seeing some improved pricing.

Caleb Dorfman - Simmons & Company

So, what do you think you need to see a continued increase in pricing going forward? Is it simply demand issue? Do you think that more supply coming off the line? And you think that demand keeps on coming back if supply going to be able to respond enough or there will be a price depreciation as a result?

Paul Vining

I guess, I will answer it this way. So, that’s a really informed decision I’ll have to be looking into the hands of Rio and Xstrata who is about to be acquired by Glencore and BHP just I think one of their met mines up for sale. The major producers and sellers that are not in the U.S. are about six-month behind us in dealing with what is a pretty significant price shift in the last 12 to 18 months than decisions that they make are going to have huge impacts on supply and therefore on pricing. Demand is always a key factor. Some recovery in Europe and some demand pickup there and we are starting to see a few pockets off, if there is a few steel plants that have started backup few blast furnaces, but I mean take a look at the data coming out of China in January. And I don’t have the split between met and steam, but their imports in January were 30 million tons. Mozambique, which we were all concerned about is being a pretty big competitor and player has not only had infrastructure, but they are looking like they are going to have some investment issues given some of the write-offs that the big mining companies have taken down there. So, I am pretty optimistic that we are seeing things starting to turn here, both in terms of demand and supply. And that ultimately is driving pricing.

Caleb Dorfman - Simmons & Company

Great. Thanks very much Paul. Very exciteful.

Operator

Our next question comes from the line of Lucas Pipes with Green Capital (sic) Brean Capital. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Lucas Pipes - Brean Capital

Good morning gentlemen.

Kevin Crutchfield

Hi Lucas.

Lucas Pipes - Brean Capital

My first question is on the Eastern cost side, so you have essentially this low hanging fruit by cutting this high cost mine, how much more of a tailwind do you expect to see in 2013 and beyond?

Frank Wood

I mean I think as we said in the script, I believe that our objective is to moderately reduce the decent comparable sales per ton in 2013. I think we will be doing that in the phase of some inflationary pressures, certainly much less than historical. And then also some volume disadvantages as we have been highlighting on some of the other questions. So, I think we are continuing to make very good progress and are very focused on. And Kevin also addressed the idle cost, idle mine cost area, which is getting a lot of focus. So, it’s going to get harder and harder. Obviously, we’ve probably done some of the things that are easiest. I think we feel – still continue to feel pretty good around the sourcing initiatives, maintenance initiatives, operational improvement initiatives that we will continue to have some beneficial effect there. But we want to kind of see that before we lower the number substantially. So, we, as we said, we are guiding some modest improvement.

Lucas Pipes - Brean Capital

That’s very helpful. Thank you. And just in terms of the met coal prices that you have locked up which you say that’s pretty representative of your average quality and maybe if you could give us a sense of where you see the various products kind of trending right now in terms of price that would also be helpful?

Kevin Crutchfield

I guess, I will answer it this way, if the answer would – the question was post saying what’s the balance of your sales that have not been priced for the year, so 53% I would say it’s on the order of 60% to 65% of what we would call better quality type coals, the high-vol As and mid-vols and low-vols things like that. And the balance of it 35% to 40% is some of the lower quality high-vol Bs and PCIs. So, in terms of the mix that’s left in un-priced, I mean we priced all of our North American business for this year. A lot of our first quarter export business that obviously was done late December and early January, prices that are different from what we are seeing in the marketplace right now.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Curt Woodworth with Nomura Securities. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Curt Woodworth - Nomura Securities

I guess I just have a follow-up to question on you know in terms of the U.S. business I believe that totally is the higher quality portion of your met mix relative to what you export, I mean obviously it seems like the Atlantic basin is still pretty weak and spots going up in the Pacific. Do you think that relative to the 106 ASP which I think while was your incremental pricing that the export price would be higher than that based on what you’re seeing right now or do you think that’s kind of about right?

Kevin Crutchfield

For the go forward sales the uncommitted export met coal such question I guess?

Curt Woodworth - Nomura Securities

Yes.

Kevin Crutchfield

It's all about the rebound, I mean in terms of where we see pricing go on certainly in the last three quarters of the year, the commitments we made in the first quarter for export where in the lower $100 on overall average and obviously the North American sediments were well above that, probably at or above the equivalent of the benchmark type price. But I think it's all about the outlook and have a pricing recovers and how it sticks so it could be in the 90s, it could be in the 100s, it's I mean we’re pretty optimistic about where we see the signs right now.

Curt Woodworth - Nomura Securities

Okay and then in terms of things getting a little bit better, are you seeing the spreads come in at all I guess more specifically for high vol or do you feel like that quality is still you know pretty oversupplied.

Kevin Crutchfield

No we hit the bottom on that, we really have, we have seen things tighten up and like some of the marginal producers were, there were some, there were like there is always a desperation sales when we start getting them the lower end of the trough particularly as you get to the end of the calendar year, people have higher price, either domestic utility or domestic met business that was subsiding their overall production. Portfolio, when you get off into 2013 the domestic met prices going down that are domestic contracts for all and all of a sudden you have actually got to sell that coal at a price that’s rational and it makes any kind of sense relative to your cost structure. So we’re starting to see things shift in terms of pricing in part because of just that.

I think the other thing Curt, (inaudible) and we talked about this a lot in the past as we’re trying to get these lower quality metallurgical coals into the marketplace and you don’t have anything to blend them with is very challenging and that I continue to believe is one of our sweet spots, we have always possessed that ability to create more interest and they are desirable in the marketplace. So I think when nobody else can move them we still can and we’re seeing demand pull through good demand pull through signs, so far so I think it's just really a function of trying to going forward and win the Atlantic and Pacific markets due become more correlated or synchronized and that occurs, so we’re all kind of looking towards the second quarter benchmark announcement that you all will see here pretty soon.

Curt Woodworth - Nomura Securities

Okay and then in terms of the geographic distribution for your met are you looking to sell more domestically this year versus last year, I mean Asia going to be a growing piece than next because Europe’s down, are there any meaningful shifts there that you’re aware of? Thank you.

Kevin Crutchfield

I don’t think there is any material shifts on North American sales but this year is probably going to be not a whole lot different from the last year in terms of volume. We might shift a few more tons into Asia but generally speaking we kind of see the distribution similar to what we had last year in terms of the different continents and different regions.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Dudas with Sterne, Agee. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Michael Dudas - Sterne, Agee

Only a follow-up on one of Paul’s comments earlier about what the big three other than yourselves are looking at relative to met coal production going forward. Did you get the sense that even if this price move up 10 or 20 bucks that the longer term decisions and the fact that the cost curves in Australia have picked up so dramatically given the strength of the dollar and labor productivity will limit you know a supply response that could yield dampen medium-term prices going forward?

Kevin Crutchfield

That’s a good question, Michael. I mean, in our view, the Australian phenomenon is the one that we still need to watch very closely in terms of labor pressure to capital expenditure blowouts. What is that those from a clearing price for the half quality (indiscernible) coals, where that does that need to be long-term and how much as we set off a kind of historic lows. So, I think that will be the driver. And I think long-term you are going to see, I am not sure how they can get some of that back frankly. So, I think it will put in for well, I don’t know will look all discipline or stewardship or whatever, but it’s a real interesting phenomenon to watch. And ultimately while we have experienced some cost pressures of our own, I think relatively speaking we have done pretty good job of keeping them contained relative to what’s happened there. So, we continue to watch that this budget evolve with the interest and what transpires over there as we have entered in forms, what’s going to happen in our markets and how we setup our business forward too.

Michael Dudas - Sterne, Agee

And my follow-up Kevin regard to your comments about Central Appalachian inventories and production levels, I am guessing that you think 2013 will continue to see pressure on higher cost Eastern Kentucky surface or underground mines given where the high level inventories and gas prices are? And is 2013 it will be continued multi double-digit ton decrease in thermal shipments to electric utilities in the U.S.?

Kevin Crutchfield

Yeah, I mean, I think 2013 will continue, I mean from our own portfolio perspective we are pretty well positioned, but like that, that is something that we’ve got to remain very cognizant, because Central Appalachia as we pointed out, that continues to bear the bread of a lot of this and we see a lot of switching. And that’s why we have focused on the export side very carefully. But I think it’s going to take a while in other words 150 days of inventory, so we basically don’t have to buy any coal for a while. So, it’s something we are going to monitor very carefully and but I think there have been significant structural changes in Central Appalachia and it’s something that we are very in tune to obviously given our footprint, but it also does point out that having some regional diversification does help, got assets in the PRB and in Northern Appalachia that can (indiscernible) from time to time. So, we continue to monitor, but we think the Central Appalachia is going to remain under pressure for the foreseeable future.

Michael Dudas - Sterne, Agee

And I think some (indiscernible) finally just quick question is looking at the U.S. regulatory front, any changes to your thoughts on the challenges faced in the industry going forward?

Kevin Crutchfield

Yeah, we are honestly we monitor it very closely, I mean, our performance standard is probably the next good thing that we are watching very carefully to see how that unfolds and how we can influence that and whether there is any notion that the existing coal fired fleet would be lose its grandfather qualification as part of that CO2 emission standard. So, we watch that very closely, and that’s probably the thing we obviously get a question of what you’ve (indiscernible) sort of knee jerk unfounded regulation is probably the thing that worries just the most just because things we can control we don’t worry so much about, we think they are out of our control to do travels from time to time and that the regulatory environment being one of those.

Michael Dudas - Sterne, Agee

I appreciate it. Thank you, Kevin.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of David Gagliano with Barclays Capital. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

David Gagliano - Barclays Capital

Okay, great. Thanks for taking my questions. I actually just have a clarification question for Paul on the met coal side based on some of the comments you made earlier, just if you could give your mix in destination for the remaining un-priced met volumes. If prices don’t change in Europe and Asia, what’s the reasonable range for a netback price at the mines that are remaining un-priced volumes?

Paul Vining

I mean, that’s a pretty wide bark, because the product mix is anywhere from PCI coal that’s got a very low cost structure to specialty low vol coal that’s got a higher cost structure well into the $100 plus range. So, you know what we’re seeing right now in the marketplace if the prices were not to change I fully expect to sell and ship and produce met coal that we have planned right now at margins that make sense and you know if there is a lot of upside on the pricing you know maybe we complete the production a little bit but that’s yet to be seen.

David Gagliano - Barclays Capital

Let me try and rephrase that I guess you got about 11 million tons lesser price, what I’m trying to figure out is given the mix now we have got you know 60% - 65% better quality, 35% - 40% lower quality. Now all what’s left going into I guess the majority one in the Europe and some going into Pacific basin, what I’m trying to figure out is given that mix and given the destination of the remaining volumes and considering where prices are now internationally what would that translate to as far as you know sort of an average net back price and if you can just give us a range or something that would be great. Would it be, because I know you mentioned you know in the 90s or in the 100s, so I’m just trying to get a better feel for tighter range. Does that make any sense or?

Kevin Crutchfield

Yeah it does, it's kind of hard to answer I’m not trying to dodge it because you have got high vol Bs and As and low vols and PCIs and mid-vol blends that we have probably got a spread that’s alone between high vol B and high vol A of $30 a ton, $25 - $30 a ton and certainly for the high vol As it's well north of the 100 bucks and for the high vol Bs it's certainly well north of a $100 and the PCIs are probably down in the 80s and some are a little bit below that. So, it's I mean it truly is, I have got a list of products here that we shift as probably 30 or 40 different products and it's hard to just give you a wide slot unless I were to give you the forecast we have in our business and in our budget we’re not particularly open to sharing that with the world.

David Gagliano - Barclays Capital

Just API 2 and on the export thermal business, if we look at API 2 as a proxy obviously for European export prices, what’s a the reasonable assumption a range there for an average net back price with the mine. Let’s say if API 2 is in the $85 to $90 per ton zone what would that translate for you guys at the mine?

Frank Wood

On the quality it's probably the mid-50s and we’ve transacted business this year from the mid-50s for the low 60s and a lot of is I mean the beauty of the API 2 is we get a lot of business since 17 ash, 11.5, 11.6 as opposed to OTC which is you know a 12.5, 12.13 ash that we’re shipping basically all or mostly raw coal as without the processing internally 40% of the product that we actually mine.

Operator

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Chris Haberlin with Davenport. Please proceed with your question. Your line is live.

Chris Haberlin – Davenport

To kind of go little bit deeper into the Central App inventory, what’s your outlook for inventory draw in Central App just given that the coal gas economies are still favoring gaps and then where do you think we need to get in order to see pricing starting to move higher?

Kevin Crutchfield

I would say the draw is going to be heavily dependent this year on weather. I mean and the gas prices, you know certainly how hottest it's going to be this summer and how hard those plants are going to run. We could see a draw a 10 or 15 million tons and things get really back in balance. But that’s not going to create some huge surge in demand quite frankly because the long term structural demand for Central App Thermal by those fleet of plants has dropped pretty significantly. So the pricing on Central App is going to be as influenced as much if not more by API 2 and if you look long term over the next two or three years let’s go back to Central App as a basin back on it was a 180 million tons and say 120 of that was formal, 20 of it maybe one export, we had a 100 million tone demand or cap thermal coal here domestically in the U.S. and in the next year too, that’s going probably be done about 60 million tons total export in domestic and probably evenly split between the two. So, whereas the export used to be the tail and the domestic side was the dog 100 say 20, we are really as we move forward the next two or three years, it’s going to be split. So that the influence of API through markets transactions that are executed probably fix themselves Africa imports and China all the dynamics that drive an 800 million or 900 million ton market. Seaborne thermal market is as big, if not bigger than the U.S. market is today and likely to grow for several years to come. So, we are more focused on the impact that has on pricing and then our domestic inventories.

Chris Haberlin - Davenport

So, kind of thinking about the from a utility standpoint, are you all continuing to see contract deferrals and renegotiations that we saw last year or even utility re-sales to traders whether flipping into the export market or is that activity all the dried up?

Kevin Crutchfield

It hasn’t dried, but it’s a fraction of what it was 12 months ago. We got one or two customers that are nudging, I wouldn’t say, they are pushing back, but generally speaking, most of the issues have been – were cleaned up last year and restructured in a way that it fits the customer’s timing and portfolio.

Chris Haberlin - Davenport

And then just last question for you Paul, I think earlier you said you were starting to see some narrowing in the spreads between Australia and in U.S. met pricing, and I just want to kind of see what’s your outlook there and what will it take for U.S. pricing to really call that as discount, is it solely dependent on an improving Atlantic basin market?

Paul Vining

No, I think it’s about the benchmark too. I mean, basically I mean when the benchmark ran up to $300, let’s say, we – the U.S. guys were selling coal well above the benchmark on a delivered basis. And that’s because supply was so tight, there was no product. And on the converse, it’s true the market overreacts the other way when it gets to trough and the discounts on the other side become huge as the market overcorrects. And as it starts to comeback those spreads will start to narrow as customers come back to buy more of the U.S. product, because it is lower priced on a delivered basis in a lot of the markets. What I am hanging on or had on Europe, I mean it’s a fundamental building block for our business, solid customers 30 years of relationships and it’s – that won’t change, but the opportunity is really going to be watching this benchmark, how it changes in the coming quarters and the position that U.S. producers get to take including Alpha.

Chris Haberlin - Davenport

Thanks very much for your insight.

Operator

Thank you. Mr. Crutchfield, there are no further questions at this time. I would like to turn the floor back over to you for any closing comments you may have.

Kevin Crutchfield

Okay, thank you. And again thanks to everyone for tuning in on today’s call as we mentioned today though 2012 was filled with its challenges. We believe we have turned the corner. We clearly have some more work to do around the hedges and we’ll look forward to keep you posted on those activities over the course of the next few quarters. Again, thanks very much for tuning in today and everybody have a great day. Thank you.

Operator

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time and we thank you all for your participation. Good day.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!

Source: Alpha Natural Resources' CEO Discusses Q4 2012 Results - Earnings Call Transcript
This Transcript
All Transcripts