Abstract: This article collects case studies of overseas mergers and acquisitions (M&As) involving Chinese mining enterprises from 2008 to the first half of 2009. It statistically analyzes and examines these M&A cases from various perspectives, including the entities involved in the M&As, the types of minerals targeted, the flow of funds, the countries involved, and the M&A methods employed. Additionally, the article offers some thoughtful analysis and reflection on the risks faced by these overseas M&A cases.
    Keywords: Cross-border mineral resource M&A, risks, and future outlook
    I. Basic Situation of Overseas Mergers and Acquisitions by China’s Mining Enterprises
In the economic environment of the global financial crisis in 2008, Chinese mining enterprises became relatively active in overseas mining mergers and acquisitions. According to publicly available data, from January 2008 to the first half of 2009, Chinese mining companies carried out more than 80 overseas M&A deals, involving a total amount approaching 30 billion U.S. dollars (this statistical data excludes M&A deals in the oil and gas sector, such as those involving petroleum and natural gas). We conducted a statistical analysis of these overseas M&A cases by several key dimensions: the entities involved in the M&A, the amounts at stake, the types of minerals targeted, the flow of funds, the countries and regions where the acquisition targets were located, and the specific M&A methods employed. Overall, the majority of the acquired mineral resources were metallic ores, followed by non-metallic minerals, while the coal industry accounted for a relatively smaller share. Many energy and coal industry enterprises, such as Datang and China National Coal Group, although no actual M&A deals have been completed yet, have publicly expressed their intention to pursue overseas acquisitions in relevant media and claimed that they are currently in negotiations and expect to reach agreements within this year.
    II. Characteristics of Overseas Mergers and Acquisitions by China’s Mining Enterprises
    1 · M&A Entities and the Amount Involved
Among the more than 80 M&A deals for which incomplete statistics are available, over 70% of the entities involved in overseas M&A activities by Chinese mining companies are large-scale mining corporations. These primarily include major state-owned holding groups such as Chinalco, China Minmetals, Hunan Valin Steel, Wuhan Iron and Steel, Anshan Iron and Steel, China National Steel Corporation, China Shenhua Group, Yunnan Tin Group, Zhongjin Lingnan, and Jinchuan Group.
The total amount involved in these cases is approximately 30 billion U.S. dollars. Among this, mergers and acquisitions involving large mining conglomerates account for 80%, while those involving non-state-owned enterprises account for roughly 20%. The sources of funding for these overseas M&A deals are highly diversified, including state-owned capital, funds raised from A-share markets, and financing obtained from banks and mutual funds, among other methods.
    2 In merger and acquisition deals, iron ore is the most common.
We conducted a statistical analysis based on the primary mineral resources of the acquired companies. Among the more than 80 merger and acquisition cases included in our incomplete statistics, the minerals that attracted the most interest from acquiring firms were primarily precious metals such as iron, copper, lead-zinc, uranium, and gold. Ranked roughly in descending order according to the frequency of M&A activity, they are: iron ore → precious metals including gold → copper and lead-zinc ores → uranium ore → rare metals → non-metallic minerals.
Among these, acquisitions of iron ore mines accounted for the largest share, making up roughly 20% of all M&A deals. Next were precious metal mines such as gold, accounting for about 13%. Following that were copper mines and lead-zinc mines, each representing around 9%. Uranium mines were also relatively popular, with a total of four M&A deals, accounting for approximately 5% of all M&A transactions. Other rare metals—including titanium, nickel, manganese, tungsten, and cobalt—each accounted for roughly 4%. The smallest category was non-metallic minerals, primarily bauxite and carnallite, each comprising less than 3%.
    3 M&A funds are leaning toward iron, copper, and gold.  
We conducted our analysis based on the primary minerals mined by the acquired companies, while co-produced minerals were categorized according to their associated primary minerals. Notably, prospective investments were not included in this analysis. From the perspective of capital flows, approximately 40% of the funds have been directed toward iron ore mines. Among these transactions, the most remarkable one is China Aluminum Corporation’s acquisition of Rio Tinto (whose primary mineral is iron ore). The first acquisition took place in February 2008, when China Aluminum purchased a 12% stake in Rio Tinto from the open market for US$14.05 billion. The second attempt occurred in February 2009, when China Aluminum sought to increase its stake in Rio Tinto to 18% by investing a massive US$19.5 billion; however, this effort ended in failure. In July 2009, China Aluminum once again participated in Rio Tinto’s rights issue and currently maintains its position as Rio Tinto’s largest shareholder, holding a stake worth US$1.5 billion.
Investment funds flowing into precious metals such as gold totaled approximately 3 billion U.S. dollars, accounting for around 4.5% of the total amount involved. Funds allocated to acquiring copper mines amounted to roughly 5 billion U.S. dollars, representing nearly 7% of the total sum involved. The amount involved in transactions specifically targeting lead-zinc mines was about 1.7 billion U.S. dollars, or roughly 2% of the total. Among the four mergers and acquisitions involving uranium mines, the exact amounts involved are difficult to pinpoint precisely; based on available information, the amounts involved exceed 100 million U.S. dollars. The amount involved in rare-metal transactions was approximately 1 billion U.S. dollars, accounting for about 1.5%. The amount involved in non-metallic mineral transactions was over 1 billion U.S. dollars, representing roughly 2% of the total amount involved.
    4 Nearly half of the M&A funds are flowing to resource-rich countries such as Canada and Australia.  
The author conducted the statistical analysis based on the headquarters location of the acquired companies. If a company has multiple headquarters or is listed simultaneously in different countries, the analysis was conducted according to the location of the company’s primary business activities. Among the more than 80 merger and acquisition cases for which data were incomplete, the majority of M&A funds flowed into resource-rich countries such as Australia and Canada—specifically, 29 cases involving Australia and 13 cases involving Canada, accounting for roughly half of the total number of cases involved. These two countries hold substantial global mineral resources; their mining companies not only control mines within their own territories but also own many mines in countries across Central and South America and Africa.
Next are the countries of South Africa, with a total of 9 cases. Following closely are Brazil and Peru in South America. Since control over many mines in these countries is held by mining companies from developed nations such as Rio Tinto of the UK and Australia, obtaining mining rights in these countries still requires purchasing them from mining companies based in Australia and other developed nations. Next are neighboring Asian countries such as Laos, Indonesia, the Philippines, Mongolia, and Myanmar. There are also other countries involved; in Europe, mining companies from Norway and Germany are particularly active. In the Middle East, there’s the copper mine in the Aynak region of Afghanistan. As for uranium mines, the primary investing countries are Kazakhstan within the Commonwealth of Independent States, as well as Australia and South Africa.
    5 The M&A approach primarily involves equity participation.
Mergers and acquisitions can be categorized into three main types: equity participation, controlling interest acquisition, and investment in establishing a company for independent operation. When acquiring a project through equity participation, the acquired equity stake does not exceed 50%. This approach involves relatively lower investment risks but offers insufficient influence over the operational control of the enterprise. In contrast, acquiring a project via a controlling interest involves taking over between 50.1% and 100% of the equity, enabling full operational autonomy but also carrying higher risks. Among the more than 80 M&A cases surveyed (though incomplete), 85% of mining enterprises obtained mineral resources by means of partial equity participation. Cases involving controlling interests or outright acquisitions accounted for only 9, representing less than 12% of the total number of cases involved. A small number of enterprises have chosen to form joint ventures and establish local mining subsidiaries, acquiring rights and interests to carry out exploration and development activities for mineral resources; such enterprises account for roughly 2% of the total.
    III. Challenges Posed by Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions  
The financial crisis has brought unprecedented opportunities as well as significant challenges to China’s mining enterprises.
One of the challenges stems first and foremost from pressure exerted by international public opinion. Since most of China’s mining enterprises have state-owned enterprise backgrounds, when they engage in overseas mergers and acquisitions of mineral resources, they are immediately confronted with various forms of pressure—from governments, corporations, local communities, and even the media—in the host countries. Moreover, China’s overseas acquisitions of mining assets also pose competitive pressures on resource-demanding countries such as Japan and India. Some Japanese media have even claimed that China’s large-scale overseas resource acquisitions could erode Japanese companies’ share of overseas mineral resources. As a result, debates over Chinese mining enterprises’ overseas M&As have continued unabated internationally, thereby to some extent hindering the pace of these enterprises’ internationalization and artificially complicating what would otherwise be a straightforward commercial undertaking. For example, although China has repeatedly expressed through its Foreign Ministry spokespersons its hope that foreign governments will adopt an open attitude toward Chinese enterprises, in September 2009, the Australian subsidiary of China’s Wuhan Iron and Steel Group sought to acquire a 50% stake in Australia’s Plains Company’s Hawks Nest iron ore project. However, given that the project is located near the Woomera military restricted zone in Australia, the Australian Department of Defense still raised objections, citing security concerns.
The second challenge stems from the risk of information asymmetry. Due to the information asymmetry that Chinese mining enterprises face regarding foreign local mining laws, mining investment environments, and cultural factors, they often encounter the difficulty of “being able to swallow but unable to digest.”
The third challenge stems from the risk of continuity in follow-up investments. Under the lingering impact of the financial crisis, the global economic growth outlook is bleak, and global capital flows are set to decline further. If, after an M&A deal, the acquired company fails to operate smoothly and subsequent funding cannot be secured smoothly, even a successful acquisition cannot be considered a complete internationalization transformation. Without the capacity for sustainable development, the situation could end up mirroring Japan’s wave of large-scale overseas M&A activities in the early 1990s—where many companies ultimately withdrew at a loss.
The fourth challenge stems from difficulties in accessing financing channels and an incomplete supporting infrastructure, which are constraining the pace of internationalization of China’s small and medium-sized enterprises and private mining companies. Only when private enterprises truly become active participants in this market can we achieve genuine prosperity in the internationalization of mining enterprises.
    IV. Some Reflections
    1 One point for consideration: China is becoming a major driving force behind the development of the international mining industry.
Following the financial crisis, the global economic landscape is undergoing a major reshuffle. Although developed countries such as those in Europe and the U.S. are attempting to regain their leadership by erecting new trade barriers—such as environmental and ecological standards—they are now facing increasing competition from emerging economies, particularly those in the developing world, which are becoming a vital pillar of global economic growth and playing an increasingly important role on the international stage. According to statistics from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, per capita GDP in developing countries grew by nearly 30% between 2003 and 2007. Against the backdrop of a slowing U.S. economy, emerging economies like China and India are increasingly becoming new sources of foreign investment. Whether through the internationalization strategies pursued by their multinational corporations or via the investment activities of their sovereign wealth funds, China has the potential to remain an active international investor, thereby continuing to drive forward the development of the global mining industry.
    2 Thought No. 2: The internationalization process of China’s multinational mining companies will continue.  
Since 2000, China’s mining enterprises have undergone a transformative journey—from being unable to go global to actively going abroad—and have accumulated substantial experience in “going global.” At the same time, they have cultivated a pool of talent who are familiar with and proficient in the standard operating procedures commonly adopted by international exploration companies, thereby enhancing China’s understanding of overseas mining investment environments. In today’s world, as the global economic landscape is undergoing adjustments, the trend toward the globalization of the mining industry will continue. Meanwhile, the internationalization process of China’s multinational corporations will also proceed amid twists and turns.
    3 Thought No. 3: The entities involved in mergers and acquisitions and their funding sources will become more diversified.  
Currently, China's overseas mineral resource mergers and acquisitions are primarily led by well-established listed companies such as Chinalco, China Minmetals, Hunan Valin Steel, Wuhan Iron and Steel, Ansteel, China Steel Corporation, China Shenhua, Yunnan Tin Industry, Zhongjin Lingnan, Jinchuan Group, Zijin Mining, China Gold, and Shandong Luneng. Although overseas mining investments led by private enterprises like Zijin Mining have been quite active in recent years, the overall investment amounts still fall short of those made by large-scale mining corporations. Although these investments currently account for a relatively small share of the total, they have made significant progress compared to just a few years ago and are now exhibiting a more dynamic trend toward internationalization. As global mining becomes increasingly internationalized, China’s overseas mineral resource investment entities will inevitably become more diversified—just as Japan and South Korea have already done—encompassing participants ranging from state-owned holding companies to private enterprises, including not only pure-play mining firms but also non-industry investment groups and private equity firms. Moreover, financing channels will continue to broaden, adopting a diversified approach that spans everything from fundraising through A-shares and bank loans to private equity funds.
    4 Thought No. 4: China’s approaches to acquiring overseas mineral resources through mergers and acquisitions will become more mature and diversified.  
Currently, Chinese mining enterprises primarily adopt equity participation as their approach to overseas mergers and acquisitions, with the equity stake in these acquisitions typically not exceeding 50%. Cases involving controlling interests or outright acquisitions account for less than 12% of the total number of such transactions. A small number of enterprises have also chosen to establish joint ventures locally, setting up subsidiary mining companies and acquiring rights and interests to carry out exploration and development activities for mineral resources. As the global financial crisis eases, the international mining sector recovers, and Chinese mining enterprises continue to accumulate experience in overseas mineral resource investments, the ways in which Chinese mining firms engage in overseas mineral resources will expand further and become increasingly diverse. These engagements will range from acquiring foreign mining companies and taking minority equity stakes to partnering with foreign enterprises to set up subsidiaries overseas. Moreover, Chinese mining enterprises will increasingly participate in both upstream and downstream segments of mining projects, and their investment approaches will become more sophisticated and diversified.
    References ??? [1] Ministry of Commerce website. http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI/tzdt/dt/t20090924_112318.htm
[2] NDRC website http://www.sdpc.gov.cn/wzly/
[3] Xinhua Net. http://news.xinhuanet.com
[4] People's Daily Online. http://energy.people.com.cn
[5] Steel Home Website. http://www.steelhome.cn/
[6] China Mining Network. http://www.chinamining.com.cn
[7] MySteel.com. http://www.mysteel.com