«No negative pressure to «Kazzinc», where Glencore presented 69,61%, don't expect. Moreover, the United company, judging by the statements of the leaders of Xstrata and Glencore, is aimed at further increase of capitalization and its share in the world market of non-ferrous metals. However, after the purchase of last February the Fund «Samruk-Kazyna» 29%stake in the «Kazzinc», Glencore Xstrata actually lost the chances to expand its share in Kazakhstan's asset, despite the expressed first of interest in this,» said Artyom Ustimenko. He also added that, in his opinion, in many respects the decision of Glencore on «Kazzinc» had been subjected to correction because of the need of priority financing of the transaction for a merger with Xstrata.
As the analyst believes, the United company there are good prospects on the market. «Glencore Xstrata may take a dominant position in some segments of their profile (including supplies of zinc), as well as to continue the consolidation of international assets in the framework of the competition with such giants as BHP Billiton, Vale, Rio Tinto», - the expert predicts.
However, in the coming months Glencore Xstrata is unlikely to be ready to buy major assets. «Previously held information about the interest to such companies as Anglo American, Rio Tinto PLC, etc., however, the company is not ready to purchase assets for the time being, first of all, in view of the continuing uncertainty in the global commodities market and the need to stabilize the financial results after the closing of the transaction», - explained Mr. Ustimenko.
According to the expert, the company is not be included in the share of ENRC for the time being. «The rumors about the entry of the company in ENRC continue to circulate on the market. However, not taking into account the related political factors, the transaction on ENRC is much more a «lift» in the financial plan for Glencore Xstrata, than, for example, redemption of the same Anglo American Plc, the market capitalization of which is estimated almost in 7 times higher than in ENRC. Accordingly, this 22.7 billion pounds sterling against 3.4 billion pounds sterling», - concluded the analyst.