I’m not kidding, either: unless you know how to grade a load of mixed non-ferrous scrap metal, this post really isn’t going to be of much interest. Still reading? Okay, then, one more thing: to fully appreciate this post, it will help to have some familiarity with the alleged Ningbo scrap kidnapping that took place in late October, and which I’ve documented – at some length, here and here and here (and that’s just for starters).
To be clear: I’d just about sworn off additional scrap kidnapping-related posts when – on November 24 – the dimwits at Xinhua, China’s state-owned news agency, decided to run an article entitled “Police refute so-called kidnap of British businessman.” As the title suggests, the article is based upon information given to Xinhua by Ningbo’s police. This would be problematic under most circumstances, but in the case of this alleged kidnapping, it is doubly so: the investigation was apparently conducted by an economic crimes officer in Ningbo; the alleged kidnapper is one of Ningbo’s largest state-owned enterprises (the Xinhua article appears to have been written in response to this very good Financial Times article).
[Interlude: If for no other reason, the Xinhua article must be considred a minor classic for this passage, alone:
During [alleged kidnapee] Srivastav’s stay in Ningbo, [alleged kidnapper] Meng said he had accompanied Srivastav to bars, shops and the wedding of a friend. “He was impressed, calling us forgiving Chinese friends.”]
In any event, the state-owned company’s defense, repeated in the Xinhua story and elsewhere, is that the kidnapping could not be considered a kidnapping because Gold Arrow, the British scrap trading company involved in this dispute, had breached a contract by sending aluminum and iron scrap to Ningbo, when the contract had specified a mixed copper load (“Guanghe claimed it found only aluminium and iron in the scrap in October“). That is to say: a commercial dispute cannot be a kidnapping (see above referenced FT article for more on cultural misunderstandings). Obviously, this is total BS. But putting aside a discussion of just what constitutes a kidnapping, let’s instead ask: was there copper in Gold Arrow’s shipments to Ningbo?
Below, are four photos. They show the contents of four of the disputed Gold Arrow containers. Click on each image for an enlargement.
Looks like copper to me. But I’m just a scrap blogger/journalist. What say you, scrap readers?
[Final note: Is it just me, or does the Xinhua story read as if it was written by someone at the British Foreign Office?]
Copper! Xinhua shills.
Thanks for the link to the China Daily story. I’m surprised you didn’t mention that the story claims that Guanghe paid for the load in full while Gold Arrow claims that Guanghe only paid a 10% deposit. Of course if Guanghe had paid in full there wouldn’t be a legal claim over the load. But Guanghe reneged like so many other Chinese scrap dealers and then tried to get its deposit back. It’s going to be a long time before many foreign exporters do business with China for less than 50% deposit again.
Mark – Yes, I noticed that. But generally, I try to avoid lengthy critiques of Xinhua pieces. They’re just not worth the time. Agreement on your last point concerning 50%. Those days are over.
I read from the chinadaily piece, and the claim is 50% of the load is copper. I do not see 50% copper recovery in the images.
Sean – Thanks for the comment. However, I’m going to disagree with you. Two points.
First of all, as I’m sure you know, it’s almost impossible to judge the various percentages of a specific metal in a mixed load without actually unloading the container and sorting it. Often, for tax purposes, the more expensive material – in this case, copper – is buried beneath the less expensive metal.
Second, true, the China Daily article claims that there was a contract for mixed metal with 50% copper. But that is incorrect; the percentages were lower. More important, and more illuminating, Guanghe claims, in the China Daily article, that “it found only aluminum and iron in the scrap in October.” This is clearly false (there is copper in that material), and it suggests – once again – that Guanghe is using any means necessary, including lies, to extract money from Gold Arrow.
Anyway, Sean, I appreciate that you keep reading, and I really value your comments.
Usually the buyer tells the seller to fill in the ship documents with an incorrect copper content to cheat on the taxes. The content is usually higher. Adam is right that you can’t tell until you unload it. The Chinese buyer is just playing games here. Everyone knows that.
It’s impossible to gage the copper content based on those pictures. The material is obviously from a mechanical process that would have predictable recoveries of various metals over time. Any minimal amount of research prior to purchasing this product would reveal content.
Scrap Buyer -
You are correct, of course. There’s no way to tell the copper content by the photos.
A quick clarification: these photos were taken in Ningbo, after the containers were received and inspected at port. There, the buyer claimed – absurdly – that there was NO copper content in the load (as repeated to the Chinese state-owned media).