|
2#

楼主 |
发表于 2010-3-31 06:38:54
|
只看该作者
The benefits from ending the system of so-called benchmark contracts, however, are less clear. BHP has been aggressively pursuing this for years, as has Vale. Their reasoning is obvious: spot prices are sky-high and the process of annual negotiations is a shambles. Producers were also worried that things were becoming a tad one-sided. During the depths of the financial crisis some steel mills refused to honour their contracts, buying cheaper ore in the spot market.
But long-term contracts can be symbiotic for producers and clients if properly enforced. In boom periods, steel mills need guaranteed supply. But in leaner times producers benefit from certain demand. Mills are expensive to turn off and on, while the capital needed to open up a new mine site is crippling. Spot prices are also volatile. All these factors, in theory, favour longer-term negotiated prices. Don't write them off yet. |
|