www.transicionestructural.NET es un nuevo foro, que a partir del 25/06/2012 se ha separado de su homónimo .COM. No se compartirán nuevos mensajes o usuarios a partir de dicho día.
0 Usuarios y 3 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
Que bueno J.L. Cava hoy y manana TE-ista Obligatorio verlo. Como se emociona -me encanta-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGhIqJxNc3g
Winners & Losers in May: winners...Nvidia 30%, Magnificent 7 Tech 16%; losers...CNY -3%, Bitcoin -8%, KRE -9%, China -9% (HSI in bear market), oil -11%...AI "baby bubble" dominant, China beared-up by stalled reopening & capital isolation theme.
Cita de: siempretarde en Junio 02, 2023, 12:40:23 pmQue bueno J.L. Cava hoy y manana TE-ista Obligatorio verlo. Como se emociona -me encanta-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGhIqJxNc3gTal y como comentó siempretarde el viernes parece que, efectivamente, este fin de semana José Luis Cava estaba en plan transitionist-mode [on]:José Luis Cava | Agenda 2030: van a por los ahorradores.3/6/23-10hJosé Luis Cava | Nos quedamos sin jóvenes: las consecuencias y la posible solución. 4/6/23 - 10hSaludos.
¿Cuántos "será en..." llevamos? ¿Desde hace cuántos años?¿Cuántos cisnes negros llevamos? ¿En cuántos años?Busquen la honestidad: el futuro NO LO SABE NADIE.Guárdense de falsos profetas que se alimentan del resentimiento.Un saludo a todos.
Ya que sale la matemática, ¡ja!, de la oferta y la demanda, si Walras levantara la cabeza, abominaría del falsoliberalismo neoliberal, porque, a diferencia de su padre, tenía sensibilidad. Walras es anterior a Marshall, solo que era francés, algo imperdonable para el imperio. El padre de Walras, que también era economista, preocupado por la sensibilidad de su hijito, le escribió en 1859 lo siguiente, lean detenidamente, señoras, señores: «Algo que encuentro perfectamente satisfactorio en el plan de tu trabajo es tu intención —que apruebo desde cualquier punto de vista— de mantenerte en los límites más inofensivos respecto a los señores propietarios. Hay que dedicarse a la economía política como uno se dedicaría a la acústica o a la mecánica».
What Stops Millions of Americans From Going Green: Their LandlordsPosted by EditorDavid on Sunday June 04, 2023 @07:34AM from the not-easy-being-green dept.The Washington Post looks at "Americans who want to lower their carbon footprints — but are stymied by their landlords."CitarHomes and apartments burn oil and gas, suck up electricity, and account for about one-fifth of the United States' total greenhouse gas emissions. But current attempts to green America's homes, including billions of dollars in tax credits for energy efficient appliances and retrofits, seem aimed at the affluent owners of detached, single-family homes — in short, Mad-Men-style suburbias. In reality, about one-third of the country's households live in rented apartments or houses... And they generally do not have the spare cash — or the permission from their landlords — to make environmental upgrades. Part of the issue is what's known in economics as the "split-incentive problem," or the "landlord-tenant problem." Roughly 75% of tenants in the United States pay their own utility bills; that means they have a strong incentive to try to conserve electricity, water, or gas to save cash. But their landlords, who have to pay for installing and replacing those appliances and heating systems, don't. They benefit from renting out their properties as quickly and cheaply as possible...Renters, therefore, are often stuck with leaky housing, inefficient appliances and ancient heating systems. According to one study from 2018, renters use almost 3 percent more energy than homeowners thanks to the split incentive problem... President Biden's signature climate bill includes an estimated $37 billion in tax credits to help households switch to efficient heat pumps, water heaters, or to seal up and insulate their homes. Those credits are applicable to individual homeowners or renters — but not landlords. According to IRS guidance, "the credits are never available for a home that you don't use as a residence." And few renters are going to want to spend thousands of dollars on a heat pump that they'll have to leave behind when they move...If the landlord problem isn't solved, millions of less wealthy Americans could be left out of the green transition — and will be stuck with higher energy bills. For example, even in the same income bracket, homeowners are almost three times more likely than renters to own electric vehicles — largely because renters lack home charging. There are programs, including some in America's giant climate bill, that could change this... Still, those programs haven't launched yet and aren't expected until at least late this year. And even though renters make up one-third of American households, they're still getting less investment; the tax credits for homeowners are uncapped. The federal government could end up spending well over $50 billion on homeowners, and about $8 billion on renters.Most renters remain at the mercy of their apartment managers and landlords.
Homes and apartments burn oil and gas, suck up electricity, and account for about one-fifth of the United States' total greenhouse gas emissions. But current attempts to green America's homes, including billions of dollars in tax credits for energy efficient appliances and retrofits, seem aimed at the affluent owners of detached, single-family homes — in short, Mad-Men-style suburbias. In reality, about one-third of the country's households live in rented apartments or houses... And they generally do not have the spare cash — or the permission from their landlords — to make environmental upgrades. Part of the issue is what's known in economics as the "split-incentive problem," or the "landlord-tenant problem." Roughly 75% of tenants in the United States pay their own utility bills; that means they have a strong incentive to try to conserve electricity, water, or gas to save cash. But their landlords, who have to pay for installing and replacing those appliances and heating systems, don't. They benefit from renting out their properties as quickly and cheaply as possible...Renters, therefore, are often stuck with leaky housing, inefficient appliances and ancient heating systems. According to one study from 2018, renters use almost 3 percent more energy than homeowners thanks to the split incentive problem... President Biden's signature climate bill includes an estimated $37 billion in tax credits to help households switch to efficient heat pumps, water heaters, or to seal up and insulate their homes. Those credits are applicable to individual homeowners or renters — but not landlords. According to IRS guidance, "the credits are never available for a home that you don't use as a residence." And few renters are going to want to spend thousands of dollars on a heat pump that they'll have to leave behind when they move...If the landlord problem isn't solved, millions of less wealthy Americans could be left out of the green transition — and will be stuck with higher energy bills. For example, even in the same income bracket, homeowners are almost three times more likely than renters to own electric vehicles — largely because renters lack home charging. There are programs, including some in America's giant climate bill, that could change this... Still, those programs haven't launched yet and aren't expected until at least late this year. And even though renters make up one-third of American households, they're still getting less investment; the tax credits for homeowners are uncapped. The federal government could end up spending well over $50 billion on homeowners, and about $8 billion on renters.Most renters remain at the mercy of their apartment managers and landlords.
A Lifeline for Property Is All Gummed UpAlternative lenders once made good money issuing commercial real-estate loans—now they are stuck on the sidelinesBanks are getting stingy with commercial property mortgages. Ideally, alternative lenders could step in and help landlords to refinance their debts, but this part of the lending market isn’t in great shape either.Loans for the property industry are drying up fast. The CBRE Lending Momentum Index, a proxy for U.S. commercial real estate lending, fell 54% in the first quarter of 2023 compared with a year ago. Banks, which usually issue around half of all commercial real-estate loans in the U.S., are stepping back until it is clear where real-estate values will settle. Their deposits are shrinking and they need to hold on to cash in case the property loans already on their books get into difficulty. Alternative lenders would love to fill in some of the gaps. “When the market is dislocated, it is often the best time to invest,” says Harbor Group International President Richard Litton, whose firm recently raised $1.6 billion for a debt fund focused on financing apartments.Real estate debt funds made good returns in the years after the 2008 global financial crisis, which was the last time the banks took a step back from property lending. Blackstone said on its latest earnings call that this year will be “a very favorable time” to be a real estate lender as property owners hunt for scarce credit. Private lenders charge a lot more than banks. Debt fund spreads for floating-rate loans can range from 3 to 7.5 percentage points above the secured overnight financing rate (SOFR) depending on the asset, according to Rachel Vinson, CBRE’s U.S. president of debt and structured finance. Bank spreads are lower—usually 2 to 2.5 percentage points above SOFR.But the high rates that alternative lenders now charge make their loans unappealing to most borrowers. A floating rate bridge loan for a multifamily apartment block from a debt fund will cost 8% to 10% today. Property buyers would need to find buildings at a very low price to justify taking on such an expensive loan. (...)The crunch in both bank and nonbank lending is happening at a bad time for landlords, as 2023 is a busy year for loan maturities. A wall of securitized debt valued at $163 billion—the biggest annual amount over the next decade—comes due this year, according to Marc McDevitt, senior managing director at CRED iQ. This figure doesn’t include the loans sitting on banks’ books.Alternative lenders can offer only a drop in the ocean compared with how much cash the property industry actually needs. Last month, real estate debt funds in North America had $42.7 billion of dry powder, according to Preqin data—enough to refinance just over a quarter of the securitized debt maturing in the U.S. this year.The real solution to the property industry’s problems is to get banks lending again. It could take quite some time.
@RobinBrooksIIFEuro is falling against the Dollar, but that's just the Dollar making up lost ground as markets scale back US recession odds. The Euro is actually insanely strong. One easy way to see this is to look at Euro versus Yen. EUR/JPY is at its strongest levels in more than a decade...
CitarWhat Stops Millions of Americans From Going Green: Their LandlordsPosted by EditorDavid on Sunday June 04, 2023 @07:34AM from the not-easy-being-green dept.
What Stops Millions of Americans From Going Green: Their LandlordsPosted by EditorDavid on Sunday June 04, 2023 @07:34AM from the not-easy-being-green dept.
World Bank's new chief asks staff to 'double down' on development, climate effortsWASHINGTON, June 2 (Reuters) - The World Bank's new president Ajay Banga on Friday asked the lender's 16,000 staff to "double down" on development and climate efforts as he seeks to accelerate the bank's evolution to tackle the most pressing global problems.On his first day in the job, the former Mastercard (MA.N) CEO told staff in a memo seen by Reuters that he would seek to recruit each of them to work towards his vision "to create a world free from poverty on a livable planet.""Making good on our ambition will require us to evolve to maximize resources and write a new playbook, to think creatively, take informed risks and forge new partnerships with civil society and multilateral institutions," Banga wrote.He also said the bank needed to become more efficient, slashing the approval time for financing projects, which can now take up to three years."The process is overly elaborate and subject to multiple review mechanisms that not only cost valuable years but erode staff ambition," he said, adding to a "trust deficit" among developing countries.Banga on Thursday met with U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who urged him to "get the most out of the bank's balance sheet" and mobilize more private capital, the Treasury said.Yellen last year began pressing the World Bank and other multilateral lenders to revamp their business models and dramatically scale up lending resources to address climate change, pandemics, food security and other global crises.This would move the development lenders beyond the country-specific project loans they have pursued for decades, though she has demanded they maintain their core mission to reduce poverty.In his memo, which incorporated his statement to the World Bank Executive Board during an April 1 job interview, Banga said annual investments of trillions of dollars were needed to arrest the forces of climate change and fragility, while building up human capital and fighting inequality in health, education, and financial access."We are at a critical moment in the arc of humanity and the planet. The World Bank Group is being asked to lead the way, to double down on development and climate efforts and to deliver even more impact and results," he said.He added this would require "all shoulders to the wheel," and all of the World Bank's divisions working together to deliver solutions needed by the world.Banga, 63, was elected to a five-year term as World Bank president by the lender's board of governors in May. Nominated by U.S. President Joe Biden, the Indian-born finance and development expert was the sole contender for the job.CLIMATE DEMANDSHe takes over from David Malpass, who came under criticism last year after remarks that raised questions about his personal views on global warming despite doubling the bank's climate finance during his tenure to $32 billion last year.Climate and development groups welcomed Banga and began presenting demands, including that the bank fully withdraw from financing fossil fuel projects and take stronger action to cancel the debts of poor countries.Kevin Gallagher, director of Boston University's Global Development Policy Center, said Banga will first need to restore staff morale at the bank and quickly implement balance sheet reforms to squeeze more lending from existing resources."On his watch, the world has to deliver on the sustainable development goals and a big tranche of the Paris climate commitments. There's just no way he can do it without a capital increase and a major increase in resources."[/quote]
I'm an ex-Amazon senior leader. Here's why layoffs keep happening and why ambitious managers are fueling them.*Brandon Southern is the former head of analytics at eBay, Amazon, and GameStop. *He explains that companies say they want efficient teams but don't reward those who create them.*Southern also says that managers add headcount when seeking a promotion and bloat the company.I've realized that managers are responsible for layoffs.As the former head of analytics at eBay, Amazon, and GameStop, I have seen several layoffs throughout my 20+ years in the workforce. I've recently been thinking a bit deeper about why layoffs occur at companies such as Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and others. At most companies, the reason for layoffs is almost always the same: trimming expenses with a goal to achieve better margins. But many of those expenses shouldn't have existed to begin with. From what I've seen, managers are responsible for layoffs because they end up bloating a company when seeking promotions. Let me explain.When it comes to promotion size mattersTo get promoted, you have to show that you're able to manage a larger scope, which almost always includes managing more team members. But managers rarely inherit additional teams or team members. Instead, the only way that managers can demonstrate their ability to lead a larger team is to hire more people. By hiring more team members, the manager's scope would naturally increase which increased the odds of being promoted. Even though executives at every company I've worked at — including Amazon, eBay, Gamestop, VMware, and multiple start-ups — stressed the importance of creating more efficient teams, they never actually rewarded those who were able to operate efficiently.So instead of incentivizing leaders to create more efficient and profitable organizations, managers are incentivized to do the opposite. Efficient teams would often end up getting their expenses reduced even further because they're performing well with their current resources (while other teams would see an increase in their budgets or more hires because it looks like they need more to operate).At the end of the day, everyone wants a bigger team or budget A manager's cost-saving efforts don't impact one team in isolation. A standstill on budget or headcount reflects on the manager and the manager's manager — all the way to the top. So even if a leader says they want more efficiency, what they really want is a bigger scope and promotion to help them move up as well. And efficient teams aren't actually helping them get there. And if you're the person who is reducing scope and budget (actual or relative to others), then you're working against your manager — which is never a good thing to do. If this doesn't feel convincing enough, we have the annual review process to offer additional evidence: Rarely do we see a goal written in someone's review or performance asking them to reduce costs. Without goals and targets for individual employees, they aren't incentivized to become more thoughtful and creative to reduce costs.As great as becoming efficient sounds, it's almost always at odds with getting promoted. This is why so many leaders first look to add more headcount instead of first looking to make the organization more efficient. And why not? When times are good, money is flowing, riskier projects are accepted, and budgets are getting approved. It's quicker, easier, the smart choice for personal success, and everyone else is doing it. But it's a ticking time bomb.By not temporarily changing the mindset to assume that the only way to grow is through efficiency and cost savings, managers will take the shortest and most lucrative path — which is to default hiring instead of increasing efficiency. This has and will continue to cause organizations to quickly become bloated while the increased operating expenses are shadowed by recent revenue and profit growth. But when the next inevitable downturn occurs, the company will be forced to remove the bloat by reducing headcount to maintain costs and margin.Executives can break the cycle by rewarding efficiencies To break the cycle, executives will need to address problems head-on and reward for efficiencies while not over-rewarding to the point where managers focus on making their organization as small as possible. For example, if executives over-incentivize for efficiency, managers could try to reduce expenses and headcount to a level that leads to a reduction in long-term investments that are crucial to the company's success. Instead, they should maintain a proper balance of rewarding managers that champion cost-saving process improvement plans while hiring for strategic reasons and projects.However, given human nature and the constant desire to build something bigger, I doubt that there is any real concern with managers trying to make their organizations as small as possible.Brandon Southern is the former head of analytics at eBay, Amazon, and GameStop. He also creates TikToks about data analytics and career development.
Las vacaciones más caras de nuestra vidaAtaque al bolsillo · La inflación, una demanda disparada e incluso los algoritmos para optimizar precios encarecen un verano que va a romper récords. Pero el sector dice que los beneficios no serán para tirar cohetesHabrá que madrugar más que nunca para encontrar sitio en las playas españolas, que este verano van a estar más concurridas que nunca. E. C.Zigor Aldama | Sábado, 3 de junio 2023 Habrá que madrugar más que nunca para encontrar sitio en las playas españolas, que este verano van a estar más concurridas que nunca. E. C. La tormenta perfecta descargará este verano con toda su furia sobre el bolsillo de quienes se vayan de viaje. Porque a la elevada inflación que dispara los precios en la hostelería se suma el implacable efecto de la ley de la oferta y la demanda, que encarece el alojamiento y los billetes de avión. Por si fuese poco, la adopción de tecnologías como el 'big data' y la inteligencia artificial para determinar precios dinámicos resulta especialmente eficaz a la hora de extraer hasta el último euro que el viajero está dispuesto a pagar. La suma de estos factores arroja un resultado claro: van a ser las vacaciones más caras de la historia.El primer bofetón, y quizá el más sonoro, lo dan las aerolíneas al reservar un vuelo. Porque, según la Confederación Española de Agencias de Viajes (CEAV), las tarifas han aumentado entre el 10% y el 20%. A pesar de ello, en los cuatro primeros meses del año el número de pasajeros se ha incrementado en un 2% con respecto a 2019, y la Asociación de Líneas Aéreas (ALA) vaticina que esa tasa alcance el 2,5% en verano. «Vamos al 100% de ocupación casi siempre. Tenemos 'overbooking' e incluso los pilotos que viajamos en 'stand by' nos quedamos a veces en tierra», comenta un comandante de Vueling que pide mantenerse en el anonimato.«Aunque aún no se operan tantos vuelos como antes de la pandemia, el número de pasajeros sube porque se están utilizando aviones más grandes», explica Javier Gándara, presidente de ALA, subrayando que las tarifas aún «son muy competitivas». Sobre todo si se tiene en cuenta que «el combustible todavía está en torno a un 40% más caro que antes de la pandemia y que se han pactado notables subidas salariales». En cualquier caso, la carestía depende del destino, y afecta sobre todo a los vuelos intercontinentales: si antes de la pandemia volar a Shanghái costaba en torno a 700 euros ida y vuelta, ahora la tarifa duplica esa cifra, algo que sucede con la mayoría de las ciudades del resto de Asia y de América.El efecto champánA pesar de todo, Gándara señala que esas tarifas «y el 'boom' que viven los destinos vacacionales» no compensarán este año las pérdidas provocadas por la covid. «Muchas líneas aéreas tuvieron que endeudarse para sobrevivir y solo alguna logrará recuperarse en 2023», analiza. Además, los viajes de negocios, la principal fuente de ingresos de estas empresas, se recuperan más lentamente y se están reconfigurando.Pase lo que pase, la gente no se va a quedar en tierra. «Acabo de salir de Correos y había cola para pedir el voto por correo. La gente viaja como nunca a pesar de los precios. Este verano vamos a romper récords, porque hay más reservas que en 2019», señala Ramón Estalella, secretario general de la Confederación Española de Hoteles y Alojamientos Turísticos (CEHAT). El porqué de la aparente contradicción entre una inflación elevada y una actividad turística desenfrenada la explica con dos razones: «Por un lado, durante la pandemia se ahorró más que nunca; por otro lado, ahora se prioriza el viaje sobre otros consumos».José Manuel Lastra, vicepresidente primero de la Confederacion Española De Agencias De Viajes (CEAV), es de la misma opinión. «La demanda ha estado tan constreñida en los últimos años que ahora no tiene en cuenta el factor precio. Es lo que llamamos efecto champán», corrobora. Es un fenómeno que primero reactivó el turismo nacional y que ahora se siente también en el internacional. «Hay más cruceros marítimos y fluviales, se ha abierto Asia y muchos viajan a Tailandia o Vietnam, Estados Unidos sigue teniendo tirón a pesar de que la inflación es superior a la de España, y, entre los destinos menos habituales, Albania pega fuerte», enumera, subrayando que, en cualquier caso, el sol y playa continuará siendo el rey absoluto del turismo estival.140 euros la nocheNo obstante, Estalella asegura que la inflación no es la que tira de los precios en los hoteles. «Es la demanda», sentencia. El número de pernoctaciones en abril aumentó un 11% y empujó el precio medio de los alojamientos hasta 104,89 euros por noche, solo cinco euros menos que en agosto de 2019. Las previsiones apuntan a que en los meses estivales de este año se puede superar una media de 140 euros. «Los hoteleros no fijan los precios, lo hace el mercado. Da igual que los costes hayan subido un 17% en el último año, porque si nadie está dispuesto a pagarlos no se pueden trasladar al cliente. Ahora son algoritmos los que analizan el mercado y optimizan los precios», explica Estalella. Y lo mismo sucede con los billetes de avión. «Cada pasajero paga un precio diferente», recalca Gándara.Comparación con los años anterioresPrecio medio de una habitación de hotelEuros al día Comparación con los años anteriores Gráfico: G.H. (EL CORREO) Fuente: INEEs evidente que los márgenes de beneficio del sector hotelero están creciendo, ayudados por una caída en los precios de la energía, pero el responsable de CEHAT concuerda con su homólogo de ALA en que los beneficios no serán abultados. «Muchas empresas se tuvieron que endeudar durante la pandemia para mantenerse a flote. Ahora, esos márgenes se destinarán a pagar las deudas», analiza, subrayando que los hoteles que más han invertido en tecnología y ahorro energético son los que mejor preparados están para darle un buen bocado al jugoso pastel que se presenta en verano.España gana competitividadLa inflación, sin embargo, sí que se ha trasladado directamente a la hostelería. Así que la visita al chiringuito deparará algún susto que otro. Sobre todo porque tanto los alimentos como los alquileres y la mano de obra suponen una parte muy relevante de los costes del sector y todos están por las nubes. El sobrecoste de la electricidad y del gas se está suavizando, pero hay materias primas como los aceites que se han disparado un 50%. Y, como muchos trabajadores se fueron a otros sectores durante la pandemia, los sueldos en hostelería son los que más han subido: concretamente, un 12,6% en 2022.Incremento de costes salariales IV trimestre 2022; variación evolución interanual (%) Tabla: G.H. (EL CORREO) Fuente: Hostelería de España «A pesar de eso, hemos logrado minimizar las subidas de precio», afirma Emilio Gallego, secretario general de Hostelería de España. Y, precisamente, eso ha logrado que España gane competitividad frente a los países del entorno, donde la inflación ha sido más acusada. «Nosotros somos exportadores netos de alimentos y tenemos un porcentaje elevado de renovables, mientras que Reino Unido depende de las importaciones de comida y Alemania sufre la crisis energética de forma mucho más acusada», analiza Gallego. «Además, en nuestro país no hay aún una saturación en el sector hostelero –existen 180.000 bares y 280.000 establecimientos que emplean a 1,8 millones de trabajadores–, por lo que somos el país más competitivo del mundo y un destino cada vez más atractivo», sentencia.La previsión tiene premioPor todo ello, el responsable de la asociación de hostelería tiene claro que este año «se van a registrar los mejores datos de la historia» y resta importancia a la caída del poder adquisitivo de los españoles: «Los sueldos suben y las pensiones se han revalorizado un 8%. La gente quiere gastar en experiencias, en relajarse y divertirse. Hay un cambio sociológico y la gente es más hedonista y tiene más tiempo libre para disfrutarlo», zanja.La gran incógnita es si este 'turismo de venganza' se mantendrá a lo largo de los próximos años y si los precios acabarán bajando. Todos los expertos consultados tienen esperanza en que lo primero suceda, pero son escépticos en cuanto a lo segundo. «Lo que se ha hecho es recuperar la senda al alza que la pandemia truncó. Puede que los crecimientos se moderen, pero la cultura viajera se ha asentado en nuestro país y no tiene vuelta atrás», comenta Lastra, que sí ve cierto margen para que los billetes de avión bajen un poco de precio cuando las aerolíneas recuperen el equilibrio.«Lo que sí ha vuelto para quedarse es la reserva anticipada como fórmula para encontrar mejores precios», sentencia. Y todos concuerdan. «Aunque todavía se demanda más flexibilidad, la incertidumbre baja y, aunque las elecciones en julio nos preocupan, cada vez se reservan más vacaciones con antelación», concurre Estalella. La previsión tiene premio, pero no hay forma de evitar que en el chiringuito cobren las consumiciones como un restaurante con estrella Michelin. Y si una caña a 6 euros puede parecer cara, hay que recordar que para un británico es una auténtica ganga.
A pit whodunnitWho is keeping coal alive?The financiers saving the world’s dirtiest fuel from extinction(...)Financing more digging at existing mines—the second link in the supply chain—is no problem either. Last year coal production hit a record 8bn tonnes. It is not quite business as usual. Since 2018 many mining “majors” (large, diversified groups listed on public markets) have sold some or all of their coal assets. Yet rather than being decommissioned, disposed assets have been picked up by private miners, emerging-market rivals and private-equity groups. New owners have no qualms about making full use of mines. In 2021 Anglo American, a London-based major, spun off its South African mines into a new firm that instantly pledged to crank up output.Like traders, the miners have been printing money. Australia’s three biggest pure-play coal producers went from posting net debt of $1bn in 2021 to $6bn in net cash last year. They have repaid most of their long-term borrowing, so have no big deadlines to meet soon. “The conversation has gone from ‘How do I refinance my debt?’ to ‘What do I do with my extra cash?’,” says a finance chief at one of them.Coal miners can still borrow money when needed. Data compiled by Urgewald shows that they secured an aggregate $62bn in bank loans between 2019 and 2021. According to the charity’s research, Japanese firms (smbc, Sumitomo, Mitsubishi) were the biggest lenders, followed by Bank of China and America’s jpMorgan Chase and Citigroup. European banks also featured in the top 15. During this period coal miners, mainly Chinese, also managed to sell $150bn worth of bonds and shares, often underwritten by Chinese banks. The liquidity is not drying out. Urgewald calculates that in 2022 60 large banks helped channel $13bn towards the world’s 30 largest coal producers.This is possible because the coal-exclusion policies of financial firms are wildly inconsistent. Many do not kick in until 2025. Some cover only new clients. Others prohibit financing for projects, but not general corporate loans that miners may use to dig for coal. Policies that do restrict such lending often do so only for miners that derive lots of their revenue from coal, typically 25% or 50%. Many big firms, including Glencore, a Swiss commodities giant which produces 110m tonnes a year, fall below such thresholds.Some policies are vaguely worded to allow for exemptions. Although Goldman Sachs, a bank, promises to stop financing thermal-coal mining companies that do not have a diversification strategy “within a reasonable timeframe”, it has reportedly continued to lend to Peabody, a huge Australian miner that derived 78% of its revenue from coal sales in 2022 (it may have helped that the firm recently launched a modest solar subsidiary). Out of 426 large banks, investors and insurers assessed by Reclaim Finance, another charity, only 26 were deemed to have a coal-exit policy consistent with a 2050 net-zero scenario. Even fewer have said they will exit completely. Most of China and India’s state-owned banks have said nothing at all.In short, few banks are ready to hurt their top line or their country’s supply. Analysts reckon that this will help existing mines meet demand until the early 2030s. At this point, there may finally be a crunch. Western banks, many of which periodically revise their policies, will gradually tighten the screws. The paucity of new projects today—the third link in the chain—means there may not be enough fresh supply when old mines stop producing. Although finance for new projects is getting harder to attain, it is still available. As Western banks retreat, other players are coming to the fore. Capital expenditure by Western miners has been feeble for years. Having spent big in the 2000s, many suffered when prices crashed in the mid-2010s. Even though they are making hefty profits again, the majors prefer to buy rivals, reopen old mines or return capital to shareholders rather than launch new ventures. The investment drought is most severe in coal. Building a pit from scratch can take more than a decade. Years are spent obtaining permits, which in the West are increasingly refused.Financing for new projects in rich countries is a particular hurdle. Last year Adani Group, an Indian firm that runs Carmichael, a mega coal mine being built in Queensland, had to refinance out of its own pocket $500m in bonds it had issued for the project. Some opportunistic pots of money will continue to target juicy profits, especially if prices rise. The first deep coal pit to be dug in Britain in decades is ultimately owned by emr Capital, a private-equity firm incorporated in the Cayman Islands. Peter Ryan of Goba Capital, an investment firm in Miami, expects its coal assets, which span the whole supply chain, to grow eight-fold by 2030.The picture in Asia, though, is different. Banks are still on the scene. Asian investors are starting to back new mines at home. Family offices, set up to invest the fortunes of the rich, are increasingly interested. Any business dynasty in Indonesia, where mining is the backbone of the economy, has to have some coal in its holdings, says a trader who sources his wares there. In India obscure property firms are bidding for land that may be mined for coal. Eventually companies from the same countries may come to dig mines overseas, with banks following them. Chinese forays in the West will remain rare; Indian and Indonesian firms, which already own an archipelago of coal assets in Australia, are bound to increase their footprint.The coal market of the 2030s will thus look very different. “From ownership and operation to funding and consumption, coal will be a developing-market commodity,” predicts a boss of a mining major. Supply constraints will keep prices high, but the cast of exporters cashing in will shrink. Colombia and South Africa, which serve Europe, will no longer have a market. Russia will find it harder to flog cargoes to China, despite discounts. All three will export less coal for less money. Australia will appease critics by focusing on the most efficient coal: it may export lower volumes, but charge more. Indonesia could become the swing exporter, like Saudi Arabia is for oil today. It will sell more of its basic coal—often for more money.Although coal is on a downward slope, its goodbye is likely to be an uncomfortably long one. By the 2040s demand may finally crater for good, as enough renewables come on stream. Yet even then some countries may choose to keep their options open. More energy shocks will come. “And when there is one, the commodity no one wants is the one we need to use again,” says a big trader who serves Asia. “That feature of coal could stay for ever.”