Enemalta lost €45 million on hedging in 2009

Tariffs hiked as oil prices spiked in 2008 leading to massive hedging loss.

The hiked tariffs followed a rise in Brent crude oil to a historical record high of $146 per barrel in July 2008.
The hiked tariffs followed a rise in Brent crude oil to a historical record high of $146 per barrel in July 2008.

The newly released statements of Enemalta Corporation have revealed that the national energy company registered €45 million in hedging losses in 2009, after having raised its energy tariffs in late 2008.

The hiked tariffs remain a source of controversy that has marked Lawrence Gonzi's legislature, after Brent crude oil rose to a historical record high of $146 per barrel in July 2008.

But the 2009 financial statements, tabled in parliament on Wednesday evening by finance minister Tonio Fenech, shows the corporation lost €45 million on its hedging agreement in 2009. The year before, it registered a €3 million gain on hedging.

According to the directors' report, in 2009 Enemalta's hedging strategy was a zero-cost collar structure before changing this in 2010 by buying fuel at a fixed $81 per barrel.

A zero cost collar strategy works by setting a maximum and minimum price range for the purchase of fuel: if the spot price goes higher than the price range, then the buyer must pay that difference.

So in 2010, the corporation Enemalta hedged all its fuel exposure at a fixed €81 rate, giving it an element of stability in devising its tariff model and protecting it from any increase in crude oil prices. "Enemalta deems swap structures are an attractive alternative to zero cost collars."

Indeed, in the first four months of 2011 Enemalta recorded a hedging gain of 26 million US dollars. Even when oil prices exceeded the $126 mark due to political instability in the Middle East and North Africa, by the end of April 2011 Enemalta's oil hedging portfolio was in-the-money by €44.5 million.

In the money does not necessarily mean Enemalta made a profit: it means the strike price at which it purchased the fuel was less than its actual cost, so the option was considered worth exercising, or in the money.

Overall, Enemalta Corporation registered a loss after tax of €45,213,000 for the 12-month period sending 31 December 2009. In the 15-month period ending 31 December 2009, it lost €46.6 million.

Enemalta's electricity division reported an operating loss of €29.4 million, an increase of €9.2 million over the previous year. Its petroleum division reported profits of €511,000, after losing €11.9 million in 2008 mainly due to the impairment of land and buildings of €7 million.

The gas division remained loss-making at €2.38 million losses in 2009, compared to €5.4 million in 2008. The lower loss was the result of improved purchasing costs of liquefied petroleum gas. The gas division was later privatised.

Bank lending to Enemalta also grew from €448 million in 2009 to €579 million according to the Auditor General's annual report.

avatar
Hedging is an art and a science at the same time. It is an expert's job, and if Enemalta do not have these types of persons to do it, then they should engage a foreigner. I am not that keen on not employing locals, but this involves millions of Euro, and the cost would be worthwhile. In the meantime, could we know whether some local consulting company of PN leanings is being contracted (at the usual exorbitant costs) to carry out this work on behalf of Enemalta?
avatar
U iva, mitt miljun 'l hawn u mitt miljun l'hemm; x'differenza taghmel ghal GonziminghajrFrancoPN? Ir-rating tal -Credit rating agencies niezel waqt li l-inkopetenza u d-dej tiela' l fuq!
avatar
Luke Camilleri
Hedging should be CALCULATED GAMBLING with CALCULATED RISKS by experts in the field, and these "experts" should be identified and be accountable for their performance, performance agreements and overall responsibility for actions taken! If they are not good at their jobs, terminate their agreement and employ more exerts in hedging who deliver! Air Malta have been making profits in hedging agreements, why not Enemalta? What kind of Cwiec Maltin are in charge of hedging at Enemalta? http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110830/local/air-malta-says-its-losses-have-been-contained.382547 Fuel savings project The airline said it also had a project to save money in the way it used its aircraft. "IATA believes that savings could be in the order of €2m per year. A number of workshops will be held for those involved. Fuel Hedging The airline said that the 2012 budget fuel is expected to reach approximately €68m per year - €16m more than 2011. "It is our largest cost item. We have amended our fuel hedging policy to be more proactive, monitoring prices daily and through this we have already saved €1m this year.
avatar
Bil-hedging u minghajr hedging; il-problema hi ta min jiehu hsieb ix-xiri; jew ma jafx x qed jaghmel jew mela l-but. Tajjeb li l-prim jiccekkja. Meta tkun minn fuq 26m u tigi minn taht 46m ifisser li f disa xhur intilfu 71m kumbinazzjoni kemm kien jiswa l midmed.
avatar
I am not convinced that Enemalta should hedge in the first place. Hedging is just as much "gambling" as not hedging, because you risk paying more for your oil than you would have, had you not hedged. The only valid reason for hedging, is a desire and need to eliminate great fluctuations in costs. But since Enemalta already has borrowed EUR 660 million (which we have to pay), I don't see why liquidity has suddenly become a priority. If you can autofinance the risk, it is always cheaper in the long run, because you save the spread.