Seeking Alpha
Seeking Alpha Portfolio App for iPad
Finance
(1)
Market Currents

Critics have long accused the potash industry of operating like a cartel to keep prices...

  • Monday, July 2, 2012, 5:30 PM ET
    Critics have long accused the potash industry of operating like a cartel to keep prices artificially high. They're now closer to having their day in court, as a U.S. Court of Appeals rules an antitrust suit against potash producers can proceed - likely to play out over a long time, with no one sure where it will go. POT, AGU and MOS could face total damages of $2B-$6.5B if they lose.
Track new comments on this story

This news story has 23 comments:

  • 02/16/2012: Jim Cramer said POT was going to $200 (pre-split). Was he talking about something he was smoking? Another industry colluding to screw its customers. Shocking!
    2 Jul 2012, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • russia - smiling from the sidelines
    2 Jul 2012, 06:15 PM Reply Like
  • BHP was rebuffed in their attempt to buy POT...so they are building their own potash mine in Saskatchewan. Looks like significant new capacity coming on the market.
    2 Jul 2012, 06:24 PM Reply Like
  • Hasn't OPEC been a cartel for decades and the U.S. and other countries continue buying from them.Unless these companies forced someone to buy their products,where is the damage?
    2 Jul 2012, 06:41 PM Reply Like
  • Because OPEC aren't companies operating inside the US. Collusion is illegal in the US, so the US can go after companies that operate here.
    2 Jul 2012, 10:23 PM Reply Like
  • "The class action suit alleges that seven Canadian, Russian and Belarusian companies have colluded to keep U.S. prices elevated, effectively acting as a “global cartel”. The defendants, including Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan Inc. and Agrium Inc., dominate world supply."

    Mike, sounds pretty much like the description of OPEC. Your line about "companies that operate here" is bogus. Their product is sold here, but so is OPEC's product. What we need is the Muslim Brotherhood to take over Canada, then Obama and Holder would drop this witchhunt and start sucking up to the Canadians.
    3 Jul 2012, 02:26 AM Reply Like
  • Its not bogus at all, its a fact. Companies forming cartels and countries forming cartels are two very different things. The US can bring a case against Mosiac and Agrium. and have the legal capacity to win. Its much harder to bring a case against the Saudi king and have it been enforceable. Sovereign nations that do not operate inside the US are not bound by US law. Do you think the US is going to use the 5th fleet to try to collect a fine against OPEC???

    And its not a witchhunt, Canopotex is pretty close to, if not definitely, a cartel.
    3 Jul 2012, 08:16 AM Reply Like
  • No, they're not different things. A cartel is a cartel, whether government sanctioned or not. A suit can be brought against either as can injunctions against the import of products from said entities. Your question is stupid. Do you think the US is going to invade Canada, Russia, and Belarus to enforce any judgment here? The potential remedies are the same. The most that the US is going to be able to do here is impose a fine with a threat of banning the import of product if the fine is not paid. The same that would need be done with OPEC. This is simply a political witchhunt on the part of the Obama administration because these producers are an easy target and has absolutely nothing to do with attempting to get rid of cartels in general.
    3 Jul 2012, 04:40 PM Reply Like
  • Yes, collusion, monopolistic behavior, and skirting the law are all part of the American dream. Everything you hate, especially things that come between your dreams of endless riches are all Obama's fault.
    3 Jul 2012, 08:51 PM Reply Like
  • Potash, Mosaic, and Agrium are all US listed companies. OPEC is a country. The US does not need to invade Canada to force those companies to stop acting as a cartel. The Federal Government can prosecute companies, fine them, collect that fine, and prevent the price collusion from occurring. They could prosecute OPEC, but its going to be very hard to collect the fine, and without military force, impossible to prevent OPEC from continuing to exist.

    And the article says fines could be in the $2.5-$6 billion dollar range. That's enough to do some damage to shareholders, if it turns out to be true.

    Name another cartel that a US listed company participates in, and the US government does not prosecute. This will prove your point that this is just "a political witchhunt on the part of the Obama administration".

    Here are two articles about other price fixers who have been fined in the US, the airlines and TV makers:

    http://huff.to/LQFs2N
    http://reut.rs/P90q4w

    And the Spring 2011 update from the DOJ listing price fixing settlements and fines
    http://1.usa.gov/LQFtnn
    3 Jul 2012, 09:24 PM Reply Like
  • Contrary to your claim the US doesn't have to invade any of the OPEC countries. The US is now, and has in the past as well, enforced sanctions against OPEC countries. If Obama was serious about wanting to do so he could, but he's not going to try because John Q. Public would see the result directly at the gas pump.

    The reality is enforcing sanctions against the OPEC countries would be easier than any attempt to enforce sanctions against Canada, Russia, and Belarus. Together they account for about 85% of world potash production and 80% of world reserves. Their share of annual potash production is far greater than OPEC has in the world oil market. Obama can squawk all he wants, but Canada, Russia, and Belarus are going to tell him to go pound sand. They have no motivation to do his bidding. If you had paid any attention to BHP's attempt to buy POT, you'd know that Canada views their potash resource as a strategic national asset and they're not going to give it away just because Obama does some whining. If Obama is foolish enough to cut US farmers off from the world's potash supply it's his neck that's in the noose. So in the end Obama's little witchhunt is going nowhere.

    P.s. AGU and POT are Canadian not US companies. Of all the companies involved (and you appear completely unaware that there are Belarus/Russian companies involved as well), only MOS is a US company. However Mosaic's potash production is from Canada, and goes through Canpotex, so you're still dealing with a Canadian company, and any attempt to screw with it will meet stiff resistance from the Saskatchewan/Canadian govts.
    5 Jul 2012, 03:14 AM Reply Like
  • Picker, Obama's major fault is that he's into endless political pandering and selective enforcement of the law. That's the issue here. It's like with Obamacare. Last I heard there were more than 1000 companies that had received waivers so that it didn't apply to them. Basically if you're big enough and have enough clout and come with cash in hand, Obama will give you a pass. So while Obama's friends in OPEC are untouchable, Canada and Belarus are not. But as I've described below, Obama's selective enforcement isn't likely to go anywhere in this case.
    5 Jul 2012, 03:27 AM Reply Like
  • The Canadian companies are listed on US exchanges, so they are required to follow US laws. To my knowledge, the Russian and Belarus companies do not trade here, and thus are not required to follow US law.
    5 Jul 2012, 08:16 AM Reply Like
  • Not true. They need to meet the listing standards of the NYSE where they are listed, which are financial in nature. Mosaic is the only company involved that has US operations that operate under US law.

    Attempting to revive this suit is a joke. It is based on no evidence other than a multi-fold increase in Potash prices from 2003 to 2008. The reason it's a joke is such a standard could be applied to many commodity markets during that period (oil, nat gas, iron ore, coal, copper, etc. all saw like rises) so one is arguing that all these commodity markets were run by cartels, which begs the question, why only focus on this commodity market? Simply looking at price is an absurd standard, and selecting but one commodity market to attack is unethical at best. It also completely ignores the fact that potash has come down from it's 2008 highs, so one has to argue that somehow the cartel was disbanded and no longer exists. It's also claimed that the potash producers restricted supply, but a simple examination of world potash production and capacity utilization shows that to be false. Potash production and capacity utilization grew significantly during that period over the prior six year period. The problem is demand grew even faster with the obvious result that the price rose. Something which occurred in many commodity markets during that time and familiarity with econ 101 would have predicted.
    5 Jul 2012, 03:42 PM Reply Like
  • Here's a USGS survey showing world potash production grew significantly during the 2003 - 2008 period as compared to the period up to 2003. This is during the period the DOJ claims these producers were restricting supply.

    http://on.doi.gov/Nq2Lmt

    The below slide adds capacity utilization, which spiked during the period and was pegged at 100% during most of the period. Note that bringing on new greenfield capacity takes at least 5 or more years in the industry.

    http://bit.ly/Nq2Jel

    None of this supports the DOJ claim that supply restrictions rather than demand growth is to blame for the price rise during the period.
    5 Jul 2012, 04:00 PM Reply Like
  • Potash has nitrogen and phosphate operations in several states in the US. http://bit.ly/NEeOuh

    Agrium has retail locations all across the Great Plains/ Corn Belt in the US. http://bit.ly/NEeOuk
    5 Jul 2012, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • So you're saying CPS is being sued over potash operations occurring in Canada by it's parent? Do you really think that's the way the legal system works?

    How about looking at AGU, POT, or MOS in the last week. They don't seem to have cratered for fear that this revived suit is going anywhere.

    The suit has no merit, is based on claims that are contrary to the facts, has already been dismissed once, and is a politically motivated election-year hatchet attack that won't land.
    5 Jul 2012, 04:35 PM Reply Like
  • Jrj too funny Former VP Cheney and his buddies go scott free! Drive down any main street and look at the price of gas all the same 99% of the time. Iran call emergency meeting of Opec today 100 per brl un acceptable, yet the American & Canadian Gov. go out of their way to hurt our patriotic fimes! Whoo cares if india and china pay more for potash I SAY GOOD!
    2 Jul 2012, 06:57 PM Reply Like
  • Mr. Maher,

    Put any Oil & Service Station owner on the list, facts don't lie! So obvious, talk about looking the other way? Funny the USA Gov. should give each returning Vet. a 50% off gas card for serving in Iraq.

    Price fixing at the highest level, way above the common mans understanding. "Peak oil" Haaa! Peak Prices maybe.
    4 Jul 2012, 11:09 PM Reply Like
  • I dont follow you. Do you mean gas stations, or mechanics like a Firestone or Jiffy Lube? Most gas stations buy from the refiners, which are no longer owned by the oil producers (in most cases), so I don't think anyone there is controlling the flow of oil from Iraq, and Im not sure what the mechanic that changes peoples car oil has to do with Iraq.

    If you are referring to the international price of oil, we have already agreed OPEC is a cartel.
    4 Jul 2012, 11:26 PM Reply Like
  • Yes I mean the poor station owners that drive up and down main street and set their prices together. As far as collusion in the oil business I point a direct finger at our house and senate members. Refiners? what refiners we have no spare capacity, as our GOV. has made it impossible for new ventures in this business. OPEC has nothing on our US Senate members as they are one in the same.
    Maybe our Gov. should spend more time putting a real energy plan together vs. pushing around business or should I say shaking them down. I'm old, cynical, and fed up with our do nothing senate and house members, I just bet Canopotex did not stimulate coffers for re-elections enough. Yes old and bitter.... and the fake war the last administration gave us or should I say the WMD lie, gave us 4.00+ gas prices, collusion ha, you bet it was. The biggest cartel sits in Washington Mr. Maher!
    5 Jul 2012, 10:59 AM Reply Like
  • Gas stations are regulated as to when they are allowed to raise prices, and by how much they can raise them by.
    5 Jul 2012, 11:29 AM Reply Like
  • Mike, I think you're stuck in the Carter presidency. There may be some states that impose some constraints on pricing, but your statement as a generalization is patently false. I don't know which is more bizarre, this claim, or your claim above that because PetroChina and CNOOC are listed on the nyse that they operate in China according to US laws.
    5 Jul 2012, 04:12 PM Reply Like
Other date
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)