Good day and welcome to the Industries Qatar IQCD Q3 2020 results conference call. Today's conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Bobby Sarkar. Please go ahead, sir.
Thank you. Hi. Hello, everyone. This is Bobby Sarkar, Head of Research at QNB Financial Services. I wanted to welcome everyone to Industries Qatar's third quarter and nine months 2020 results conference call. On this call from QP's Privatized Companies Affairs Group, we have Abdulla Al-Hay, who is the Assistant Manager in Financial Operations. Riaz Khan, who is the Head of Investor Relations and Communications. Like usual, we will conduct this conference with management first reviewing the company's results, followed by a briefing. I would like to turn the call over now to Riaz. Riaz, please go ahead.
Thank you, Bobby. Good afternoon, and thank you all for joining us. Hope you're all staying safe. Before we go into the business and performance updates, I would like to mention that this call is purely for the investors of IQ and no media representatives should be participating in this call. Moreover, please note that this call is subject to IQ's disclaimer statements as detailed on slide number two of the IR deck. Moving on to the call. On 27th October, IQ released its results for the third quarter of 2020. Today in this call, we'll go through these results and provide you an update on key financial and operational highlights of IQ. Today on this call, along with me, I have Mr. Abdulla Al-Hay, Assistant Manager of Financial Operations. We have structured our call as follows.
At first, I will provide you a quick insight on IQ's ownership structure, competitive advantages, overall governance, and BoD structure. Secondly, Mr. Abdulla Al-Hay will brief you on IQ's key operational and financial performance metrics. Later, I will provide you with insights on segmental performance and CapEx updates. Finally, we will open the floor for the Q and A session. To start with, as detailed on slide number five of the IR deck, the ownership structure of IQ comprises of Qatar Petroleum with 51% stake, and GRSIA being the second-largest shareholder with more than 21% stake. As detailed on slide number four, IQ is credit rated by S&P with A+ and Moody's with A1 credit rating, both with a stable outlook. QP, being the main shareholder of IQ, provides most of the head office functions through a service level agreement.
The operations of IQ group companies are independently managed by its respective Board of Directors along with senior management team. The BoD structure is detailed on slide six of the IR presentation. In terms of competitive advantages, as detailed on slide seven, all of the IQ's group companies are strategically placed in terms of assured feedstock supply, solid liquidity position with a strong cash flow generation capability, and the presence of most reputed JV partners. In terms of governance structure of IQ, you may refer to slides 47 and 48 of the IR deck, which covers various aspects of IQ's code of corporate governance in detail. I will now hand over to Mr. Abdulla Al-Hay.
[Non-English content]. Thank you, Riaz. Good afternoon, and thank you all for joining us. To start with, IQ business performance for the first nine months of 2020 is a pure reflection of challenging macroeconomic conditions, where an overall decline of 48% in term of bottom line profitability was noted in comparison to the same period last year, as reflected on slide 13. Here, before we go to deep dive into our financial results, I would like to mention that the profitability and all the financial results discussed here are normalized after considering 25% profit from QAFCO, whereas in line with the requirement of IFRS, the 25% of QAFCO net profits have been reported as part of retained earnings in the published financial statement for the period ended 30 September 2020.
The financial performance was impacted by uncontrollable external factors continued from 2019, such as slowdown in the global economies, limited GDP growth, along with the unprecedented threat of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ongoing volatility in the oil price. All of these factors directly translate to an increased pressure on commodity price for our products. At the group level, the blended selling price declined by 10% year-on-year basis and contributed to a QAR 900 million decline in the group earning for the nine month of 2020, as you can see on slide 14. As detailed on slide 12, the sales volume at the group level declined by 20% compared to the nine month of 2019.
The decline in sales volume was mainly due to the changing in QAFCO trains one to four gas and sales operating agreements and mothballing of certain steel facilities starting from Q2 2020. The group production level were down on nine month of 2019 by 6%. This decline was mainly attributed to the periodic plant maintenance, unplanned shutdown, and mothballing of certain steel facilities. This was partially offset by an increase in volume related to QAFCO 25% stake acquisition, effective from 1st January 2020. In addition, as detailed on slide 14, profitability was negatively impacted due to recognition of one-off impairment losses of QAR 1.2 billion related to steel segment, scrap hauling of certain facility in Qatar, and by QAR 153 million of impairment losses in QMC.
This was mainly offset on recognition of one-off fair value gain of QAR 1.2 billion of revaluation of 75% in Qatar Fertiliser Company on account of QAFCO acquisition. As detailed on slide number 42 till 45, in response to contain the spread of COVID-19, measures were taken to monitor the fluctuating business condition and threats posed by the spread of COVID-19, with a specific focus on protecting employees, assets, and operations. Production volume were not affected by COVID-19, as there were no plant stoppage due to any demand-related reasons in COVID-19 spread, except for the plant shutdown of MTBE facility for a short period during Q2 2020 for 57 days due to commercial reasons. The MTBE facility is now back in operation, where the impact to the group in relation to the temporary shutdown of MTBE facility has remained immaterial, considering its overall contribution to the group volume.
Also, in the current distressed situation, with relentless effort of our sales and marketing partners, the group ensured that all the sales contracts are efficiently and effectively secured and minimized the disruptions of marketing, warehousing, and logistics. Moving into quarterly performance. Compared to the second quarter of 2020, the group revenue normalized net profit increased by 22% and 50% respectively. The recovery was mainly attributed to the improved product price in the current quarter. This sequential increase in price across key products was noted on the back of crude price recovery, supply shortage due to back-to-back hurricanes in U.S., causing disruption for many producers, and an overall deferral of new capacity additions and uncertainties as a result of the spread of COVID-19 pandemic. On the demand side, recent recoveries were evident and continuous, and presented simultaneous and lifting of lockdown in major markets.
Operating costs also have generally declined in line with the optimization initiatives implemented across the group. Production volume also improved during the quarter, as there were no major shutdown during the quarter. Moving into the balance sheet. It remained healthy, with liquidity at the end of September 2020 remained robust, with no debt to the group balance sheet, including QAR 8.8 billion in cash and bank balances. Despite the challenging macroeconomic condition, IQ free cash flow generation capability remained robust, and the group generated QAR 2.1 billion in term of free cash flow for the nine-month period ended September 2020, as detailed on slide number 15 of the IR deck. Before we go into the segmental update, I would like to highlight some of the key initiatives, as detailed on slide 40, which the group has taken to ensure our resilience in this challenging macroeconomic situations.
These measures, including optimization human resource structure, reducing direct costs in relation to utilities and maintenance, reducing non-production-related expenditures, including sales, marketing, corporate, and administrative expenses. Similarly, the group reviewed its CapEx program across all the segments and identified CapEx item that can be either be avoided or deferred without affecting the overall quality, safety, environmental aspects, and reliability of the operations. On overall basis, our base case strategy will continue to focus on market development, focusing on capturing new markets, creating market arbitrages, and bring logistical cost savings to the group. We will also continue to focus on productivity and efficiency gains via ongoing cost optimization program. Now, I will hand over to Riaz Khan to cover the segmental performance.
Thank you, Abdulla. I will start with petrochemicals segment as detailed on slide 24. The overall profitability of the segment has remained under pressure with an overall decline in the bottom line earnings of 38% compared to the nine months of 2019. This was mainly due to the softening demand for petrochemical products in key markets, excess capacities, combined with unprecedented dual headwinds of COVID-19 outbreak and oil price decline. Because of these external factors, the blended prices in the petchem segment declined by 20% and mainly led to a decline in the segment revenues, which declined by 18% compared to nine months of 2019. Sales volumes marginally increased by 2% compared to the same period last year. Production volumes slightly increased by 2% as the segment had lesser number of shutdowns during the year 2020 compared to the last year.
In terms of segment revenue by geography, as detailed on slide 25, Asia remains the main market for PE and MTBE products, whereas Indian subcontinent remains a key market for methanol and PE. Moving on to the fertilizer segment, as detailed on slide number 29. The bottom line profitability declined by 25% year-on-year basis on the back of overall decline in revenues and impairment provisions booked for QMC. The decline in revenue of 6% was mainly due to the overall decline in selling prices and change in revenue recognition methodology due to a temporary sales and operating arrangement for QAFCO trains one to four until 31st of July 2020. Before we go further, I must update you that during the period, the group successfully completed the acquisition of 25% stake in QAFCO at a purchase consideration of $1 billion with effect from 1st of January 2020.
With this acquisition, IQ now controls QAFCO with 100% ownership. For the nine months period ended 30 September 2020, the additional 25% stake in QAFCO added QAR 111 million and QAR 313.5 million to the group's normalized net earnings and free cash flows, respectively. As part of the bundled deal with effect from 1st of August 2020, QAFCO has entered into a new GSPA with Qatar Petroleum for a period until 31st of December 2035, covering the gas requirements of QAFCO trains one to six and QMC. In addition, as part of the same transaction, QAFCO acquired QP's 40% stake in QMC effective 1st of July 2020 for a purchase consideration of QAR 109 million. The new GSPA has more favorable and flexible terms when compared to the old agreements.
It is expected that the new GSPA would support QAFCO during lower economic cycles and bring additional financial benefits to the group, driven by improved profitability margins. In terms of segment revenue by geography, as detailed on slide 30, North and South Americas remain the main market for our fertilizer segment, along with Indian subcontinent and Asia. Now, let's discuss steel segment, where you may refer to slides 32 till 36. During 2020, the Steel segment reported a net loss of QAR 1.37 billion for the nine months of 30 September 2020 compared to a net profit of QAR 158 million for the same period of 2019. Selling prices remained flat compared to the nine months of 2019. Whereas sales volumes have declined against a backdrop of softened local demand as many large infrastructure projects in Qatar neared or reached completion stage.
This was coupled with management's decision of mothballing certain facilities in Qatar with an intention to cater local sector demand as against the international demand, amid higher competition and declining margins internationally. Nevertheless, near to medium-term prospects of the steel segment remain domestically encouraging. The operating cost remained higher as the segment sold some of the expensive inventories carried forward from the previous periods. This was offset by OpEx savings on account of facility mothballing and optimization initiatives recently implemented. The overall revenue was down by 37% on the back of decline in sales volumes. In terms of quarter-on-quarter profitability within the segment, a recovery of 134% was noted when excluding the effect of one-off impairments from Q2 2020 results.
This was mainly due to better margins available in the local market with management's decision to concentrate in local market along with the realizations on account of new optimization initiatives started since Q2 2020. In terms of segment revenue by geography, as detailed on slide 33, Qatar along with Asia and Middle East remains the key market for the segment. Moving on to the slide 38 relating to CapEx. An important point to note here that cash flow and CapEx figures for the year 2020 till 2024 are based on 2020 approved budget and business plan, which was based on expectations of the market conditions and commodity prices prevailing in the start of the year. With current market conditions and commodity price trends, the forecasted details on the slide cannot be relied on with certainty, where the actual realizations of these figures might significantly differ as compared to these projections.
We will open the floor for the Q and A session.
Thank you, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to ask a question today, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If you are using a speakerphone, please make sure your mute function is turned off to allow your signal to reach our equipment. Please press star one to ask a question, and we'll pause for a few moments to allow everyone the opportunity to signal.
Hi, guys. It's Bobby Sarkar again. While we are waiting for questions from the audience, can I just get started with a few small questions of my own? I have four. For the QMC, Qatar Melamine, I see that you paid QAR 109 million and you promptly wrote down QAR 153 million. What is the current book value for QMC? Is that substantially impaired? That's my question one. Should I go through my questions or would you prefer to answer one by one?
Yeah, I can take your question of the QMC. Actually, the acquisition of QMC of QAR 109 million was based on the deal that we're going to buy the QMC based on the book value. The book value was QAR 109 million at that time. This is based on 1st of August.
Okay. The book value is currently QAR 109 million.
QAR 110 million. Yeah.
Okay. For QAFCO, I was kind of surprised to see that the 25% still being reflected in your equity account and not in your P&L for the third quarter. Do we expect to see a similar trend in the fourth quarter? From when are we going to see the 100% of QAFCO net income being reflected—
Yes.
—in your P&L?
To be honest, right now we are in discussion with our internal auditor because we have discussed both options and we got an opinion from the international office of the internal auditor regarding this matter. During year-end, either we're going to see the 100% reflection of QAFCO in the P&L account, otherwise the 25% profit will be reflected in the retained earnings. We're still negotiating these two options with our auditor.
Okay. I just have a couple more questions. I see there's no further evaluation gain for QAFCO, the 25% purchase. I was under the impression there would be some gains to be recorded. Is that still coming in the fourth quarter or is that it? Finally, for the steel segment, we keep hearing about these high-price inventories flowing through the P&L. Can you give me a sense of how much of this cost inventories are still left in your books and yet to be recorded, please? Thank you.
With regard to the gain value, that's already been recognized in our book, QAR 1.2 billion. I don't know if there will be any adjustment to that. Maybe we're going to see it during the Q4 at the year-end. However, the gain value been recognized of QAR 1.2 billion. With regard to the steel products, which has a high cost. To be honest, we started to get rid of these high-cost inventory. Where right now, after the mothballing, we started to sell from our recent products from the steel segment. Hopefully during Q4, you will not see this high cost of products in the steel.
Okay, great. Thank you, Abdulla. Operator, we can open up the call for Q and A. Thank you.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you find that your question has been answered, you may remove yourself from the queue by pressing star two. Our first question today comes from Belal Sabbah from Jadwa Investment. Please go ahead.
Yes, hi. Thank you for the call. Two questions from my end, please. You've mentioned that the acquisition of the 25% stake in QAFCO increased free cash flows for the nine months by QAR 313 million. Could you please give us a bit more granularity on that? Could you give us the breakdown in that free cash flow calculation? I just want to understand, this is actual free cash flow that's been calculated retroactively, or is this an estimate for what it would have been if the acquisition had taken place from the start of the year? My second question, please, would be on the steel segment. You've done a lot of efforts to mothball the international capacity and focus on local sales, and you've mentioned some cost efficiency initiatives. Are there more cost efficiency initiatives to be taking place going forward?
Can we expect more cost savings beyond just the change in the sales mix towards local sales? Thank you.
With regard to the mothballing of the steel, I will start with your second question regarding additional initiatives. Of course, we will be looking at optimizing our cost. Maybe we're going to look at our different costs so that if we can enhance our costing of the feedstock. However, the mothballing itself made a big difference in our costing calculation. Of course, we're going to be ongoing situation where we try to improve our costing. With regard to your first question regarding the acquisition, are you referring to a slide in our IR presentation of this QAR 300 million? Or it's based on—
Yes, I believe it's on slide 15.
Slide 15.
Yes. Abdulla, if you want me to jump in here. Basically, this free cash flows relates to the period from 1st of January 2020 till 30th of September 2020. This is an estimate which we calculated based on the profitability of the 25% stake in QAFCO from the inception, that is 1st of January 2020. The free cash flows of QAR 313.5 million represents nine months period. Major ingredient here, it is basically again, your profitability, which we already disclosed in the IR deck. It is almost QAR 111 million for first nine months. Then there is a big chunk of depreciation which gets loaded back towards the cash flow generation calculations.
Thank you, Riaz.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. Again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one. Our next question comes from Faisal Azmeh from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.
Hi. Thanks for the opportunity to ask questions. Three questions, if I may. Maybe firstly, when looking at slide 17, QAFCO's utilization rates declined to 92% in the third quarter versus almost 100%, when you look at the average in Q1 and Q2. Just trying to understand what drove this decline in Q3. Maybe when moving on to slide 31, and when looking at the potential volumes that QAFCO is likely to sell on a quarterly basis, is it safe to assume that the healthy run rates for QAFCO could be closer to 1.4 or 1.5 million tons a quarter compared to the 1.043 million tons that you've sold in Q3? Finally, if you can share the quarter's average blended natural gas price for the group compared to where it was last year. Thank you.
Okay. I will start with your last question. Previously, we were announcing that the average blended feedstock gas price were around $ 3.2. After we have this new gas agreement, it has affected our average, and it went down to $2.6. This $2.6 rate is reflected during our Q2 and Q3. With regard to your first question, I believe you have missed between QAFCO and Qatar Steel. Are you sure that you looked at QAFCO one, the green one? Because the utilization is almost the same. However, if you are referring to Qatar Steel—
No, if you look at—
—it went down.
If you are looking at QAFCO Q3 numbers, it is 91.8%. You look at QAFCO in Q1 and Q2, it is 103% and 98%. I am just wondering what drove the utilization rate lower to 91.8% in Q3. My final question is effectively how should we think about the—
I am not following you in the same slide. I do not know if you are on the same slide. You are on slide number 17? QAFCO for the Q.
Yes, slide 17.
Q1?
QAFCO in green was 100%. In Q1 2020 and Q2 2020, it was 103%.
Yes.
It was 98%. It declined to 91.8%.
98%. Yeah.
91.8%.
Yeah. It's not a big difference, to be honest. It's my view there will be like a planned or unplanned shutdown related to maintenance.
I see.
This is the planned or unplanned shutdown regarding the maintenance.
Which takes me to my final question on slide 31. If we look at how much volumes you've sold in Q3, which is 1.043 million tons, I'm guessing with the higher ownership and if you operate at 100%, is it safe to assume that you'd be able to achieve 1.4 million tons a quarter or 1.5 million tons a quarter? Is that something that could be targeted for Q4 and on average next year for urea?
Q3 here, what we have represented, when you see the Q3 for the urea, this is 100% of the consideration of the QAFCO. Are we expecting to sell more? We are running on the almost 100% our utilization, we sell whatever we sell. I don't know if we will be able to sell like 1.5 million on the next quarter.
Well, you have 6 million tons of urea capacity, which should put you at a quarterly rate of 1.4 million- 1.5 million. My question is, should we expect a meaningful improvement in volume sold on average next year?
Hopefully. We have owned an additional 25%, we usually sell all of our products. Hopefully this number will get improved.
All right. Thank you.
Thank you.
Again, if you'd like to ask a question, please press star one. Our next question comes from Sashank Lanka from Bank of America.
Yes. Thank you very much for the presentation and the opportunity to ask questions. I have three questions. First question is on the steel segment. When I look at slide 17, you operated at an average utilization rate of 86.8% during 3Q 2020. I think in 2Q you were close to 61%. I'm just trying to understand, is this like for like numbers that we are looking at in 2Q and 3Q? How does the 3Q operating rate compare versus Q3 2019, assuming the same capacity that is post the mothballing that took place? That's my first question.
The 2Q 2020 is reflecting the mothballing. The capacity went down. The 3Q, we consider the current utilization as 100%. Riaz, you can also jump in whenever you want.
Yeah.
So—
Basically, in terms of 61.4%, when you compare 61.4% with 87% in 3Q, the uplift is because there was a planned shutdown in 2Q happened, along with the mothballing, which we are discussing everywhere. That decline was one-off, the 61.4% which you are seeing. The numbers, I have mentioned it here on the slide. Starting from 2Q, we are considering the capacities after cutting off the mothballing effect.
Q3 operating rates is more normalized without the shutdown that you had in 2Q.
It's more reasonable. It's more normalized. Exactly.
Okay. Do you have a number for Q3 2019 in terms of a like-for-like capacity? I just want to understand how demand, for example, has changed year-on-year, assuming new mothballing capacity. Yeah.
It will be very difficult to calculate, because in Q3 2019 we were selling major chunks in the international front also. You have to take care. You cannot really eliminate the impact of the international effects from the Q3 2019 numbers. Q3 2019, we're at the nameplate capacity with the selling to the international. Q3 2020 numbers are purely Doha-based numbers and with the effect of mothballing.
Okay. That's clear. My second question is on the fertilizer segment. When you look at the margins in the segment, I think at 46%, they remained flat quarter-on-quarter in Q3 versus Q2. This was despite urea prices improving in Q3 and the new gas pricing arrangement that came into effect from August 1st. I'm just trying to understand the reason for this flat kind of margins in Q3 versus Q2 on the EBITDA side for the segment.
Maybe this is, as you can see in Q2, our margin of 48% compared to Q3, 46%. Our assumptions may be related to the shutdown that was conducted during Q3, which has also affected the volume. This might decrease our margin in the fertilizer segment.
Okay. Understood. My last question is on the CapEx guidance that you have towards the end of the presentation. When I look at the Q3 earnings presentation and then compare the Q2 earnings presentation, I think the CapEx guidance remains unchanged. I think our understanding based on the previous calls was that you were looking to optimize CapEx and spending. I'm just trying to understand where that is being reflected in, because the CapEx numbers seem to be the same, versus what you have told us in the last quarter.
Yes, you are correct.
Sashank, sorry, Abdulla, if you can jump in.
Yes, you are correct.
I can—
I will explain to him.
Okay. Sure.
This is approved budget and business plan. Okay. This is why you see the number are fixed. However, we have been taking additional initiatives. We have deferred CapEx of project. This is why you will see it in the performance of the group company. Here, since it is approved budget and business plan, we keep it as it is. Riaz, if you want to add something.
I think this was the same answer which I was about to give, that these numbers we have caveated ourselves here in the small note, which we are mentioning on the slide, that the numbers are based on a very original 2020 CapEx. In terms of reality, we are still working with the teams, and basically, we are working on the next budget and business plan. Hopefully, in Q4, you will see this slide totally revamped and updated based with the new numbers.
Is there any guidance you can give us on how much we should be modeling the new CapEx versus what you have currently in the slide?
I think it's too early to discuss because right now even we are coordinating with the teams and collecting the data and basically going back and forth. I think Abdulla can also put some more light on this. He's much more closer to this subject.
Exactly. A lot of changes happening, especially toward the CapEx, because of the low oil price. A lot of assumptions also have been changed. Right now, we are in Q4. We are also preparing all the budget for the next year. You will be seeing an update on this slide in the next one or two quarters.
Thank you very much. This is clear.
Thank you so much.
Gentlemen, we have one final question in the queue. Are you happy to take this?
Yes, please. Go ahead. No problem.
Wonderful. It comes from Talal Samhouri from Aventicum. Please go ahead.
Yes. Hi, thank you. This is Talal Samhouri from Aventicum Capital. One last question, quick question. On slide 20, your historical payout ratio has been between 40%-94%. Would it be under consideration that you may exceed 100%?
To be honest, interesting question. We do have a good amount of cash in the bank account. We have not seen before that we have paid more than 100%. We always even below the 100%. This is the board decision. When it comes to the year-end, when the board have seen the performance of this year and with the next year of budget and expenses, they will determine what is the payout ratio. They want to make sure that we keep enough cash for a tougher time where, as you can see, the next year forecasted for petrochemical price almost lower than the current Q3 price. This is maybe a concern for the board. I really don't have an answer if we're going to exceed the 100%. We have not seen it before.
Thank you.
Okay, Talal.
Okay. Thank you.
You're welcome. Is there any other questions?
There is, sir. Thank you. We have a question from [Nasim Gagular] from SICO Management. Please go ahead.
Hi. Thank you for the call. My first question is on the steel segment. What will make you rethink about the mothballed capacity, which is 55% of the total? Is there any possibility that next year you rethink and restart the mothballed capacity?
Yes. I tell you what. Basically, the market price made us to go to the position of the mothballing. We were selling our product below our cost because of the pressure of the steel market price internationally, where Chinese products then dump to the market, plus the Turkish product, and et cetera. Basically, the market price which make us take that position to mothball our facility and only to focus on the local demand. International market right now is flooded with the steel. Regarding your second question, since we are putting our facility on mothballing, if the price can improve within three months, we can go back to our full capacity and we can work on 100% of production, and we can sell even internationally if the market improves.
Okay. Thank you. Just a follow-up. What would be the price difference internationally and locally for the steel? You said three months to bring the capacity back into operation. How much would be the CapEx for those three months to bring the capacity back into the system?
Okay. I can give you what is the local prices right now. During Q3, the local price, the average is $530 . Still we are trying to improve our margin. The international price, I don't know if, Riaz, do you have the international price for the steel? It's not in my head right now.
I think the lag between the two or the gap between the two prices normally is in the range of $125-$150 per metric ton. That's basically the gap which we have normally observed quarter on quarter. Exactly, I can't tell you because we don't have the exact data as of now for the international, since we are not selling in international, starting from Q2. The gap which we have historically seen, the gap has remained in the range of almost $125-$150 per metric ton.
Whenever we see the market is attempting and improving, definitely we will go back to the full production, full capacity.
Okay. The CapEx to bring the capacity back into the system, the mothballed capacity.
CapEx that we need to spend?
Yeah.
Every year, there is a cost of QAR 10 million for the mothballing process. We do a good maintenance to our facility, which give us the assurance that we go to a full capacity in a smooth and streamlined process. Right now, we have not been informed of any additional CapEx required for the full capacity since we are doing the proper mothballing.
Just a last follow-up, if I may. Where were you selling internationally, the steel? I mean, which markets? Steel is not a global market. It's like a localized market. Price varies from region to region. Where actually you were selling this steel?
We used to sell to the GCC. This is what I can recall. We used to sell in the GCC market.
In addition to GCC, we used to have some share in the Asian market also. I don't have the number exactly, but I can refer you to the Q4 slides where you can see the international and the local demand mix. Based on that, you can see the geographical analysis. That will give you a good indication of Asia as well as the Middle Eastern markets. They used to play a key role for us.
Okay. Thank you. Thanks a lot.
Okay. Is there any other questions?
Hi, operator. Do we have any questions?
We have no further questions, gentlemen. Thank you. I'll turn the call back over to you for any closing remarks.
Okay. Thanks everyone—
Thank you.
—for dialing in. We can end the call now. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you all. Thank you for including us. Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call. Thank you for your participation.