The first question is from the line of Sumangal Nevatia from Kotak Securities.

My firs t question is on the Mozambique acquisition. Is it possible to share what sort of volume, cost structure and investment are we looking at? An d the time period as to when the tentative mine can start commercial production?

So MDR is a pre-development stage mine. It's one of the largest mining assets for prime hard coking coal available globally. We have been able to secure this. T his has got a JORC reserve of more than 800 million tonnes. We have been able to secure 92.19% of this at US$74 million outflow. The enterprise value was at US$80 million plus closing adjustments. Subject to normal approvals and conditions pre cedent, we expect to close this mine in the next half of this year. So , it could go to H2, hopefully. And we should be able to start development of the mine in FY'25. This is prime hard coking coal. You are aware we have been looking for such assets in th e past, internationally as well as domestically. This is not only going to provide us some cushioning with respect to the highly volatile PLV index. It also is logistically closer to India, and therefore, will give us an optimized cost.

Sir, is it possible to quantify some volumes or cost structure, which we can commercially produce from these mines?

As we said, this has 270 million tonnes plus of prime hard coking coal. So therefore, the ability to produce will not be a constrain. We will look at the evacuation from Beira port to start with, and we will start scaling up t he evacuation capacity as we go along and as we continue to expand our own operations. But it will be a littl e early to comment exactly with respect to how many years. As I said, it's a predevelopment mine. Explorations have been done. Resources have been identified. We will close this transaction and once we go a little deeper, we'll be able to give you some more flavor on cost and timing.

Understood. That's very clear. My second question is on the Slide 18, where you mentioned how we've increased our share of value-added over time. Is it possible to share in terms of total India consolidated entities? Wha t sort of capacity we have in value added? And what sort of contribution we think is attributable incrementally, if we do more value added in terms of margin. And then in September ’27 at 42 million tonne capacity, what are we looking at in terms of value-added mix?

So this Slide 18, basically gives you a broad story line of where we are with respect to our growth and value -added special products in our journey so far. Our current capacities of downstream operations, when I say downstream it is from hot rolled, cold rolling, galvanizing, galvalume, color coated, etcetera, is almost 12.5 million tonnes. If you were to add our downstream operation for our plate mill and the LRPC operations of wire, we will be close to 13.5 to 14 million tonnes of downstream capacity. Our focus is to see that this downstream capacity is maximized with respect to volumes. We see lesser volatility in these segments. They are more sticky in nature and typically give you an incremental EBITDA in the range of INR4,000 per tonne. Depending on the market situation, that does vary. At times it can improve, at times it can be marginally lower. But as we are growing our capacities, branding more in the downstream segment , are able to approach wind segment through our plate mill. These are all far more non-volatile areas of operation, and therefore, we see more sticky EBITDA coming through VASP operations as we go along.

And sir, FY '27, at 42 million tonnes, what's our vision there in terms of expansion pipeline, etcetera, for downstream?

So, as we grow our capacities of Hot Rolled Coil, you already have our numbers on Hot Rolled Coils. We have been keep ing a guiding principle that we would like to be at least having 50% thumb rule downstream o peration of Hot Rolled Coils. We continue to be there or better. And as we grow our capacities in our Hot Strip Mill area, we will continue to a dd facilities in both our downstream facilities at Vijayanagar, Coated or close to Dolvi. Having said that, I would also like to make one point that you would have seen in the press release that we have got the approval for the Phase III expansion at Dolvi to 15 million tonnes for integrated operations. This line is, again, a part of our VASP process because it's a 5 million tonne wide mill with 2,600 mm wide up to 32 mm product, which can give you a combination of sheet and plate s. We will be able to do plate i n this mill at much lower cost versus a normal conventional plate mill, and therefore, this will be additionally able to contribute to our accretive value story. So , this is also going to be part of our special product strategy going forward.

The next question is from the line of Ritesh Shah from Investec.

Sir, first is on the coal mine, is this the same coal mine which Anglo American acquired in 2012 for 59% stake for US$550 million. The consideration what I heard was around USD74 million. Is this the same mine?

No, this is not the same mine. This is a mine which is in that area where Vale, Rio Tinto had their mines, which is currently now with Vulcan and ICVL, International Coal Venture , they are operating in that re gion. But this mine is different. It's got a very rich hard coking coal based on the geography of that area, which we have seen. As I said, 800 million tonnes and above of resources, reserves and a very good quality hard coking coal. So therefore, we were able to close this transaction with an enterprise value of US$80 million plus closing adjustments for 100% stake, but we have now acquired 92.1 % with an outflow of US$74 million.

That's helpful. And sir, I just checked on the geography, there are 2 mines. One is Zambezi and the other one what you indicated was Benga. Looking at the past history, they have not actually done pretty well on the tonnage part. So, what gives us confidence basically on this particular asset? And if you could give some timelines on the offtake. Any guidance on the numbers be it cost or volumes maybe useful.

So, if I look at the current operations, which are ha ppening in that area of the adjoining mines, I think both together would be probably in the range of 11 million to 12 million tonnes of mining per year. They are evacuating through 2 ports that is Beira and Nacala. We will be closer to the Beira port. We will first try out evacuation through the Beira port and then look at further expanding the port operat ions to increase the capacities, otherwise do midstream loading. From an operational perspective, seeing what others are already doing now , we do not see a constraint to ramp this up in terms of capacities to where we would like it to be from an integration perspective with our operations in India and maybe potentially for the market as well.

Sir, when you say EC of 5 million tonnes, would that be a fair number to assume, say, 2 years out, 3 years out?

Sorry, could you repeat that, Ritesh?

No, I don't think we have a yearly kind of number, which can be increased. We don't see any constraints on that, but we can check further and update you . No, the mine life is already there for 15 years, extendable by another 25 years. There is that way, no problem. Resources are actually higher; reserves is what I told you. So we should be able to ramp it up. We don't see a constraint on EC.

Sure. That's helpful. And sir, second question, you emphasized on value -added products. I think on Slide number 18, you have given a number of 61% as well. Is it possible to give a broad breakup on the EBITDA for upstream and specifically on the value-added part?

As of now, maybe it will be a little difficult to do that. But as I indicated that the value -added VASP portion has been giving an incremental EBITDA in the range of INR4,000 a tonne. We continue to add capacities in downstream as well as in the Phase III of expansions in Dolvi, which we are now taking up. It will be a plate mill kind of a product with a mill cost rather a plate mill cost and that will give us the ability to market higher thickness, wider plates from this capacity in the market . So that way, I think our focus will continue. Whether we will be able to give you down the line, some more flavour on how we are structuring our downstream overall business profitability, we'll have a look a t it and then maybe come back to you over the year as we call off.

The next question is from the line of Satyadeep Jain from Ambit Capital.

I'll just follow -up to all the questions around Mozambique. Just wanted to check, I know the other players are operating. But overall, on the infrastructure, mine development, as we stand here, what kind of capex could you possibly imagine here in the next few years? I'm asking this question because all the overseas ventures by Indian companies, mining or otherwise have not really turned out against your expectatio ns, many companies ultimately end up taking impairments and losses. So , in that context, what gives you the confidence looking at the deposit? And what kind of capex do you loo k at for mine development to get this up and running? That's the first question.

So while mining is an area which requires naturally more effort and more diligence, but this particular mine, why we are looking at it and why we have taken it is because it is prime hard coking coal, which is a PLV coal, which has be en the most volatile, has impacted our costs. You will recall that it went up to US$600 and has been hovering in the US$300, US$350 for a better part of the last year. And we have had various volatility in our operations of profitability because of that. The other indexes have not been so volatile. So , we wanted to have access to PLV coal which would integrate with our operations and thereby provide the cushion t o arrest this volatility. That's the main reason. The second advantage of this particular mine is that it's a large mine logistically close to India, Mozambique. So therefore, we will be able to get into India with a faster turnaround, lesser logistics costs versus US, Canada and maybe eve n Australia. So that's why that's the second positive. From a cost perspective, it will be too early to say. It's a new mine. It's a pre -development mine. We are going to develop this after the approvals are fully in place. So, we'll have to wait for a little bit more after we get some flavour, we'll be able to tell you as to how much we'll be able to do per year and how much would be the cost structure, etcetera. But the way we see it now in our due dilig ence initially because the operating mines a round us are reasonably doing well. We do not see any concern to achieve volumes from this mine.

Okay. Secondly, on the growth path that you laid out you have Dolvi is there. Beyond Dolvi, there i s 8 million tonnes from FY27 to FY31. That seems r elatively conservative of adding only 8 million tonnes from FY27 to FY31. Could there be an upside? And when you look at that 8 million tonne, what kind of capital costs can we look at? Is it going to be s imilar to Dolvi or is there a greenfield component in that?

No. From 43.5 to 51.5 million tonnes, there is no greenfield component. It will be an option between Vijayanagar , our Salav green steel , discussion which we have been having, low carbon emitt ing steel, which we'll do in 2 phases, a 4 million tonnes facility and BPSL brownfield. So, these are all brownfield and that will take us to 8 million tonnes and beyond. As you said rightly, the scope is more. We can do 5 million in Vijayanagar, we can do 5 million in BPSL, we can do 4 million in Salav. So technically, we can do more in the brownfield expansions. But we will look at prioritizing basically 2 of them, and that's how you are seeing 8 million tonnes. But yes, there will be a capex for the third facility beyond this, which will be started before FY '31, which will start giving you probably volumes after FY'31, a year or 1.5 year after. So that is what we are evaluating whether we would be looking at BPSL in Orissa or the new site at Orissa, which is the Jagatsinghpur site.

Okay. If I can squeeze in 1 quick question on the power capacity you're adding 600 MW and 320 Mwh of battery, what is the procurement cost for that power? And how does it stack up against the PPA you have with JSW Energy for coal and other sources?

See, our strategy for renewable power, we have been highlighting that our effort will be to go towards a decarbonization pathway, which we have undertaken for ourselves. We wan t to replace thermal coal with renewable energy. We had already announced 1,000 MW of projects for renewable energy, which is already under execution mainly in Vijayanagar, some in Dolvi, a little bit in Salem. Now we are adding 600 MW to this. So, our total renewable capacity will be 1,600 MW across 3 locations, but mostly in Vijayanagar. With this, Vijayanagar will be 26% on renewable energy at 18 million tonne level, which is a good kind of a direction to achie ve. From a cost perspective, it will be difficult for me to share exactly what cost. But I would only like to say that it is more cost effective than our current power, also providing greener power with a fixed kind of a price contract over the years.

I just had one query. So now that we are ramping up capaci ties, how does the ramp-up look on a QoQ basis, say, from 1Q onwards, how will the growth basically be ? say first half versus second half, first quarter versus second quarter?

So as we ar e ramping up our capacities, you will notice in the press release, we have mentioned that the integrated steel c apacity at Vijayanagar will be completed in the next 2 months or so. Then it will start the ramp -up. The Hot Strip Mill is already commissioned. BPSL is already completed, so that production will slowly increase. But difficult to give a QoQ flavour, but I would say that H2 will see a ramp -up of both the locations. BPSL , a little earlier and JVML which is starting later, therefore, a little after. The BF3 of Vijayanagar, which we are looking at debottlenecking and increasing capacity, that shutdown, we would be taking in H2 of this year. And that would add additional capacity to our overall capacity. I think it's about 1.5 millio n tonnes or so, we'll add in that debottlenecking in addition to JVM and BPSL. So total about 8 to 8.5 million tonnes will be the total addition during this financial year by the year-end. Part of that capacity will be seen in production this year and the full impact you will see in the next year.

Okay. Also, just one other question, which is there. I just wanted to just confirm so I think you had mentioned that the journey till about 50 million tonnes is mostly brownfield in nature, and possibly a greenfield component just to understand that?

Up to 51 million tonnes is brownfield, what we have indicated t o you now. 51.5 million includes 1.5 million of US and therefore, 50 million in India. That is all based on brownfield. What I mentioned is that in the interim between FY27 to FY31, the question was whether we'll do anything more. We may look at adding another capex program, everything else going well between 1 brownfield location, which will remain and our Orissa new greenfield locatio n. And that decision we will take as we go along, that will add additional capacity beyond 51.5.

And just one last clarification. The 1 GW of RE, which is currently at JSW Steel and 600 MW, which I think is under execution. These are captive units?

These are group captive. So , we would have, as per the group captive regulations in India, we will have 26% stake in that asset.

The next question is from the line of Amit Dixit from ICICI Securities.

A couple of questions. The first one is essentially on your growth plan. Now earlier, we had indicated it will reach 50 million tonnes by FY '30. Now it seems it is delayed by 1 year. I just wanted to understand what prompted this particular delay? And mo st of our capacity if you look at it, I thought you would also like to venture into long, but even Dolvi 3 is primarily focused on flat, except BPSL expansion that we are looking at, we are nearly focusing on flat. So just wanted to get I mean, in th is 50 million tonnes that you're talking about approximate split perhaps and when do we see long's capacity being added, if any?

Yes. So your question regarding the timing, we had said FY30-31 is what we expect , it's the financial year 31. So it is up to March of 31. That is just for the sake of a financial year, we are mentioning. So, 9 months of that still is in 30 calendar year. So timing-wise, we have done no change at all. On the flat versus long, we a re looking at a possible enhancement in our long product mix, which we are studying right now. That will also be added in one of our brownfield locatio ns. There is an opportunity to do that. And that's something which is on the drawing board right now. And we would come back to you with some more detail once we finalize that. BPSL, we have anyway indicated that we could do longs, but that you already know. That's 1 option in BPSL, which we already have.

The second question is on r ealization. Now you had highlighted about coking coal cost going down by US$22 to US$27 in Q1. We have seen some price hikes being taken by various players in May. So I just wanted to get an idea on how much price hike we have taken in May and ho w much is expected in June and what co uld be on a blended basis, the overall price difference between Q4 and Q1?

So, longs and flats increased at different speeds. Long products went up faster because the secondary sector in longs increased the prices on the back of higher iron ore as well as higher thermal coal price, which went up for them. The long product price, especially bars was already low. So that price went up more. In the flats, internationally, the prices went up b y almost US$20 per tonne in China as we saw du ring this period. And in India, I think we have reflected a similar number during April and May combined. So that is whe re we are. In long products, it's slightly higher in both TMT and wire rod.

So if I compare on an average, Q1 would still be slightly lower compared to Q4 or it will be at par?

I know that that's a question which you probably are looking at. So, I would feel that it is likely to be at par or a lit tle better because the coking coal prices are going d own, as we mentioned, US$22 to US$27, we see a softer coking coal environment. As we speak today, it's US$235 or so FOB Australia and that would give benefit in quarter 1. And if this price continues for a month or 2 more, you will see the benefit flowing into quarter 2 as well. So in H1, I would say that overall, you will see a cost benefit. You are seeing already stable prices. Keep in mind that domestic prices have corrected in quarter 4 , and even after the correction now, we are probably where we were 6 months back. So , from a domestic price environment, I see it has totally bottomed out, and therefore, prices would rema in stable with maybe range bound as we go ahead. So therefore, on a QoQ perspective, I would say we are likely to be similar or a little better.

The next question is from the line of Rashi Chopra from Citi Group.

Just continuing with the last question. So , if pricing is likely to be range bound and you have a US$22 to US$27 benefit on the coking coal price. So essentially, from an EBITDA per tonne perspective, we kind of factor in the coking coal improvement and any effi ciency gains that you may be seeing, right?

Yes, Rashi, that's right. Coking coal, some efficiencies, which we see, yes, those will get built into cost reduction in quarter 1. And some part of that will flow into quarter 2. As I said, if th e coking coal continues that benefits quarter 2 as well.

On the iron ore side, just to break it down, you will have about 15 million tonnes of captive ore in Karnataka, about 25 in Orissa and 1 to 2 in Goa. Is that right?

Yes, that is 15.5 million from the existi ng mines, including the new 3 mines, which are to be operationalized in Karnataka, that's correct. And Goa mines 1 to 2 million tonnes. Correct.

And 25, Orissa?

Yes, Orissa should be in th e vicinity of 25. We can do slightly higher if that is so required. So from EC perspective, we don't have a problem. But yes, approxima tely, you can take 25 million.

The next question is from the line of Pallav Agarwal from Antique Stockbroking.

I just had a question on the iron ore price hike that NMDC took in Q4. So it doesn't seem to be reflecting in either the raw material cost or the mining premium and royalty. So was this due to the change in the mix of sourcing of iron ore in Q4?

Yes. You're right, the prices of iron ore, we were able to contain to a better mix, both from a geographic mix perspective, a grade perspective and also reduce the specific consumption. So with that, we were able to control the price of iron ore going into the cost.

And so it sustains going ahead?

Yes, this should be. We don't see a challenge in that.

Sure, sir. The other question was this quarter, subsidiaries seem to have done pretty well. So, if I ju st look at the difference between the consol . and stand alone EBITDA, it's a pretty significant number. And BPSL and the foreign subsidiaries and Coated add up to about half of it. So , which are the other subsidiaries like maybe Amba River which of these subsidiaries contributed to the EBITDA this quarter?

So the major Indian subsidiaries, which have contributed is BPS L, Coated, and you have Amba River, as you said rightly, and the balance 2 are small, which is JIGPL and Mivan. So that is the Indian subsidiaries, which have contributed to the overall EBITDA. Overseas, as you have seen and as we mentioned also has done quite well. On a yearly factor, just to give you because you will get an idea of the improvement which has happened. The US operations overall between Ohio and Texas combined generated US$75 million of EBITDA in FY '24 versus US$27 million in FY '23. And Italy generated EUR52 million versus EUR26 million in FY‘23. Going forward, we see stability in operations, both at Ohio from a steel production perspective. Baytown is doing better because of this demand of plates and wind, etcetera. And now with the investments at Ohio for special grades, along with vacuum de -gassing, soft reduction of the casters, we' ll be able t o provide those grades, which will be incrementally getting better spreads. So, US operation, we feel will do better. And Italy has bilateral orders from the Italian rail as well as from some markets around in export. And we expect the Italian operations to also do well. So, overseas, I think you have seen a substantial improvement. And I think this kind of range you will see in FY '25 as well.

The next question is from the line of Siddharth Gadekar from Equirus.

Just wanted to know what was our captive iron ore production in FY '24 and how should we see that shaping up in FY'25 and '26?

You are asking about the captive iron ore production?

Yes.

We just don't have the number off hand. Investor Relations will get back to you. But in FY '25, we will probably be using close to 35% from our captive mines. We will be mining probably a little higher, bu t some of that may also go to outside external market. So 35% will flow from the captive.

The next question is from the line of Amit Murarka from Axis Capital.

On the expansion front, Vij ayanagar and BPSL. Just wanted to understand, it seems like the ramp-up guidance seems to have been delayed to Q3 or earlier understanding was that commission by Marc h and then probably ramp up in Q1, Q2. So , is it because of the mechanical completion being delayed a bit or it's because of the market situation that the ramp- up guidance is going to Q3 now?

No, So let's look at both the assets separately. BPSL Phase II expansion commissioning is done. It's completed. There is only 1 oxygen plant, which is pending, which will be completed in June. With that BPSL is fully done. So , it will enable volume as well as some cost savings because with the oxygen, we'll get some better throughput of PCI and reduce d cost, etcetera. So BPSL ramp-up will happen faster. However, there are some shutdowns in BPSL, annual shutdowns, which are planned for some installations, which was already pre -ordered. So that may moderate some part of it, but the new capacities wi ll start running , my sense is from October onwards. So , October onwards, when I say it will start anyway running, it's anyway operational. But October onwards, you will see close to ramp up of the facilities in BPSL. So , blast furnace, which is the major area will pick up to its full capacity by October. At JVML, we have done the HSM part, as you must have read. We are doing the integrated operation now in the next 2 months. So that would basically take a little bit more time to ramp up, and it's a much bigger furnace. And that is why we are just bein g a little bit more cautious on that, and we are saying that it may ramp up by probably quarter 3 end. And you will see full capacity utilization of that particular asset by quarter 4.

Got it. Also like for Dolvi 3, would you have the land acquired, because I thought that land was going to be an issue going beyond 10 million tonnes or do you think you sorted that out?

So we've been able t o sort that out. Some of the land adjoining, we have been able to acquire and still in the process of acquiring. So , we have enough land to complete this Phase III. It's been done with that plan only. S o additional land your question, additi onal land, yes, additional land was required, which is partly procured, partly un der procurement. So , we'll be able to do that.

The next question is from the line of Ashish Jain from Macquarie.

Sir, my first question pertains to pricin g and your earlier comment on normative EBITDA closer to INR12,000/t. So like las t 12 months or so, we have seen Indian steel prices have by and large been at some premium to parity versus being at a discount in the preceding decade or so. So what's driving that? How should we think about that number? And secondly, your comment on nor mative EBITDA, if I think about it in context of the volumes, we can theoretically do INR25,000 crores, INR30,000 crores of EBITDA. Should we think that from a leverage point of view, we have peaked out if we stick to the current capex guidance that we have given for the next 3 years?

The second part of the question, I'll just request Rajeev to respond. I'll come back to you on the price.

Yes. So in terms of our capital expenditure, which we indicated about INR20,000 crores, which we will be spending in FY '25, that should be possible based on our internal accruals with refinancing of the repayments which are due. So , our take would remain flattish. S o to answer your question, yes, I think in terms of debt, we have peaked out . There could be in a quarter or 2, there could be some investment in working capital, but that should also result into release in subsequent quarters.

So the way we should also look at capex is that while we are growing, we ar e keeping a very close eye on our ratios and our ratios have improved. We are at 2.62 x as we exit the year, which was 3.2 x when we exited FY '23. So , in spite of adding so mu ch of capex, our net debt-to-EBITDA and net debt to equity both have improved. And we would like to keep this range bound and maybe improve upon as we go along. If the cash flows improve, there is a potential to reduce debt, we will do that without sacrif icing the growth. But at the same time, I don't think we will sacrifice on the ratios. As far as the price is concerned, I think difficult to give a guidance on how the price will move but I would just like to say that in India, what you should see, price is an outcome of supply and demand. So today, the way Indian steel has grown over the last 2 years at 13% - 13.5%, 14% in terms of demand growth, that consumption increase, which has happened in the country is basically pulling this steel. So, while price is 1 factor, but the movement of goods is happening. And that is something which is very, very encouraging. And we see that people are now also looking at a little bit more of trying to optimize their cost with respect to long lead time procurement. S o maybe people who are wanting to play the market they try to import as well. But otherw ise, long -lead imports for an OEM or a manufacturer is something which doesn't really pay off. So those benefits should accrue to us over time. But having said that, Ch ina imports is a concern, and we will have to continue to watch that in this year as well.

Sir, if I can just have a follow -up, like of the 9-odd million tonne that India imported this year. Is there a number that what amount of import is sti cky in nature, not dependent on pricing because I guess some of this is global contracts by global MNCs and also CRGO kind of steel, which will always come into India at least at this point of time. So is there a number which is sticky and not depending on prices and all?

So let me put it this way. I think more than 95% of the s teel, which is imported or maybe 96%, 97% is produced in India fully capable by all the domestic mills or most of the domestic mills. So therefore, availability in India for those is not a constraint. Second, you're talking about contracts, I don't think there are any long-term contracts with anybody in this from any OEM. So your question, your limited certain grades, which may be im ported because they are not MOQ, that means the minimum order quantity is not available for some special items, which may be too small for us to do. Other than that, I don't see any need for import or for somebody to rely on the import. And I don't see that as well. I think most of the import is primarily due to an opportunity of a price arbitrage, which takes place. And there a re some units which buy from their parent units in overseas. These are the only 2 reasons.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, w e would take that as a last question. I would now like to hand the conference over to the management for closing comments.

So just to summarize on what we have said earlier. I think the year has seen a very strong operational performance. We hav e been able to do growth in crude steel, in sales as well as EBITDA. Going forward, next year, and the years beyond, we have now taken up our new capacity expansion. Directionally, we are moving towards 50 million tonnes. Phase III of Dolvi will be starte d now. Our focus on value -added continues to be there. While we are growing, we are not leaving our focus on raw material security, both for iron ore and coking coal. So , we are trying to make sure that whatever we are doing in terms of growth, we make it sustainable in every way and not only on decarbonization. Thank you.

Thank you very much, la dies and gentlemen, for joining us, and please contact us if you have any other queries.

Thank you. On behalf of JSW Steel, t hat concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us. You may now disconnect your lines.