investor strategy presentation - sasol...investor strategy presentation new york: 9 april 2013 cape...

investor strategy

presentation New York: 9 April 2013

Cape Town: 19 April 2013

introduction

and safety Raj Naidu

Executive: Investor Relations and

Shareholder Value Management

better together… we deliver 3

forward-looking statements

Forward-looking statements: Sasol may, in this document, make certain statements that are not historical facts

and relate to analyses and other information which are based on forecasts of future results and estimates of

amounts not yet determinable. These statements may also relate to our future prospects, developments and

business strategies. Examples of such forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements

regarding exchange rate fluctuations, volume growth, increases in market share, total shareholder return and

cost reductions. Words such as “believe”, “anticipate”, “expect”, “intend”, “seek”, “will”, “plan”, “could”, “may”,

“endeavour” and “project” and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements,

but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements. By their very nature, forward-looking

statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, both general and specific, and there are risks that the

predictions, forecasts, projections and other forward-looking statements will not be achieved. If one or more of

these risks materialise, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results may differ

materially from those anticipated. You should understand that a number of important factors could cause

actual results to differ materially from the plans, objectives, expectations, estimates and intentions expressed

in such forward-looking statements. These factors are discussed more fully in our most recent annual report

under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Form 20-F filed on 12 October 2012 and in other filings with the

United States Securities and Exchange Commission. The list of factors discussed therein is not exhaustive;

when relying on forward-looking statements to make investment decisions, you should carefully consider both

these factors and other uncertainties and events. Forward-looking statements apply only as of the date on

which they are made, and we do not undertake any obligation to update or revise any of them, whether as a

result of new information, future events or otherwise.

setting the scene David E. Constable

Chief Executive Officer


what we will cover today

strategy execution and project prioritisation

Topic Duration Presenter

Introduction and safety 5 min Raj Naidu

Setting the scene 15 min David Constable

Portfolio management and finance 30 min Christine Ramon

● Portfolio management process

● Project prioritisation

● Funding and dividend

Q&A 15 min David Constable

Christine Ramon

Break 15 min


what we will cover today

focus on North America

Topic Duration Presenter

Our North American priorities 10 min David Constable

Our North American value proposition 20 min Lean Strauss

● Technology

● Feedstock

Our North American value proposition 40 min André de Ruyter

● Market

● Capability

Closing remarks 5 min David Constable

Q&A 20 min

David Constable

Christine Ramon

Lean Strauss

André de Ruyter

Informal lunch with management


the past 2 years

key themes

● Goal-setting and consolidation

● Prioritisation and focus

● Delivery and growth

• Well-positioned and focused regional strategies

- “Nurture and grow” in Southern Africa

- “Expand and deliver” abroad

• Cost optimisation

• Strategy review, development and execution


enhancing our long-term strategy

evaluating the current strategy and our strategic path forward

● Embarked on a review of the group strategy for the period beyond 2020

● Assessed our current strategic reality

● Developed scenarios to test potential strategic options

● Confirmed the robustness of our near- to medium-term strategy

● GTL and chemicals in our longer term future


Operations

Excellence

Capital

Excellence

Business

Excellence

Values-driven

Organisation

Foundation

Develop and empower

high-performing, values-

driven people

gro

up

im

pe

rati

ve

s

Continuously improve

and grow existing asset

base

Deliver on the

South African

transformation agenda

Sustainable growth

Accelerate GTL growth

Grow related upstream

business

Grow technological lead

Grow chemicals based

on feedstock, market

and/or technology

advantage

Develop and grow new

energy

our strategic agenda will continue to guide

our near- to medium-term strategy

grow

shareholder

value

sustainably


Financing

Technology

Feedstock

Market

Capability

our investment considerations

robust project economics remain cornerstone of our investment decisions

robust

project

economics

Do we have access to adequate funding

while maintaining our targeted gearing and

progressive dividend policy?

Do we have a technology, scale of plant or

operating know-how that provides a

competitive advantage?

Do we have a product or market position

that provides us with a compelling business

case?

Do we have the required project execution

capability?

Do we have a long-term low-cost feedstock?


Financing

Technology

Feedstock

Market

Capability


financing

robust

project

economics









case?


capability?


portfolio

management

and finance Christine Ramon

Chief Financial Officer


1. Cash generated by operations after payment of taxes

value-enhancing strategic allocation of cash

0

10

20

30

0

10

20

30

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 % %

Delivering ROIC ahead of WACC

ROIC WACC IRR target

0

10

20

30

40

50

Sources Uses Sources Uses Sources Uses Sources UsesRbn

Sources and uses of cash

Cash gen. by ops after tax¹ Asset disposals

Dividends Acquisitions and investments

Downstream energy capex Upstream capex

Chemicals capex

2010 2011 2012 1H13


Capex

M&A

Returns to

shareholders

solid strategic capital allocation process

options that maximise long-term shareholder value prioritised

Excess cash and buffer for volatility considered before capital is allocated

● Distinguish between:

• Growth / sustenance

• Upstream / downstream

• Energy / chemicals

• South Africa / international

Process

● Acquisition of businesses

● Acquisition of assets

● Dividends

● Share buybacks

● Mandatory sustenance and value-enhancing

growth capex prioritised

● Other considerations:

• Prioritisation criteria

• Geographic diversification

Response

● Considered on a case by case basis

● Progressive dividend policy followed

● Share buybacks periodically assessed for

attractiveness


Strategy

translation

Portfolio

planning

Portfolio

re-evaluation

Execution

of portfolio

robust portfolio management process

Capital

excellence

Sasol

strategy

Portfolio analysis

and identify current gaps

to achieve strategy

Selecting the optimal project

portfolio based on available

resources

Review progress on portfolio

execution and effectiveness

of capital expenditure

Execute project

following the BD&I model

and governance principles


Project categories

Financial

returns

Project risk

and execution

capability

Business

robustness

Project

maturity Markets

Competitive

advantage

(technology,

feedstock)

prioritising our strong project pipeline

Prioritisation criteria

Capital projects ranked with a focus on risk and returns

Sustenance

Mandatory

● Safety and compliance ● Statutory shutdowns

● Clean fuels specification

● Mines replacement

programme

Discretionary

● Renewal and non-statutory

maintenance

Growth

Economically justifiable

● Improve efficiency or

effectiveness

● New business opportunities

● Synfuels growth programme

● Integrated US chemicals

● US ethane cracker

● Ethylene purification

● C3 stabilisation

● FT wax expansion

● Tetramerisation

● US GTL

● Uzbekistan GTL

● Escravos GTL

● Canada GTL

● Upstream exploration and

potential acquisitions


Targeted IRR for capital investments

(on an unlevered basis)

Mechanisms to mitigate

investment risk

targeted returns compensate for investment risks

● Hurdle rate = WACC x 1,3

• Includes buffer for unforeseen project risk and

sustenance projects

• Required IRR for mega projects increased for identifiable

project specific risks

● Group WACC

• Includes country risk premium adjustment

• Based on long term target gearing

● Project financing

● Investment structures

● Lump sum EPC contracting

● Long term feedstock arrangements

● JV partners

Sustenance

● Mandatory – n/a

● Discretionary – hurdle rate

Growth

● Economically justifiable – hurdle rate

Maximise returns and minimise risks to sustainably grow shareholder value


project execution delivered through rigorous

capital governance processes

* Excludes upstream exploration + further acquisition of gas assets

● Sasol business

development and

implementation model

(BD&I Model) to govern

capital investment

decisions

● BD&I Model is

benchmarked against

“best in class”

● Staged gate approach for

approvals to ensure

balanced risk/reward

● Gate approval process

optimised to reduce impact

on project schedule

● Robust governance

structures to review and

prioritise capital projects

Idea generation

Pre-feasibility

Feasibility

Basic development

(FEED)

Implementation

BD&I model*

New energy

India CTL

Canada GTL

US ethane cracker

US GTL

Uzbekistan GTL

Tetramerisation

Secunda growth

EGTL

Gate 1

Gate 2

Gate 3

Gate 4


enabling robust investment decision-making

● Capital excellence

definition of victory to enhance project

returns through:

• World-class project execution and delivery

(cost, schedule, operability)

• Portfolio management (value optimisation,

capital governance)

• Optimise returns through procurement and

contracting

• Learning and post-implementation reviews

● Capital scrubbing and optimisation

ensures focus on higher return projects:

• Confirming project drivers

• Ensuring reliable project valuations

• Verifying and testing assumptions

• Investigating alternative solutions

Sensitivities of key assumptions tested over the long term

Key project assumptions stress tested

through Monte Carlo analysis

(Illustrative sensitivity tornado diagram)

-1,50% -0,75% 0,00% 0,75% 1,50%

Exchange rates

Commodity prices

Feedstock prices

Operating costs

Capital expenditure

Conservative assumptions

Change in IRR


prudent long term oil price view supported

by fundamentals

Marginal cost of production = about $90 per barrel

80

100

120

140

160

180

FY11 FY14 FY17 FY20 FY23 FY26 FY29

No

min

al o

il p

rice

US

$/b

bl

Oil price – long-term panel comparison


prudent long term gas price view compares

favourably to panel view

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

FY11 FY13 FY15 FY17 FY19 FY21 FY23 FY25 FY27 FY29

He

nry

Hu

b g

as p

rice

($

/MM

)

Gas price – long-term panel comparison


focused on managing long-term gearing

within target

Incorporates progressive dividend policy

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22

Ge

arin

g

Ca

pe

x s

pen

d

South Africa Rest of Africa Europe Middle East

Far East North America South East Asia /Aus Total Growth

Total Sustenance Gearing Target gearing

Gearing

within targeted range

during capex peak


maintaining flexibility to fund capital investments

All options are under consideration

Internal options

Debt options

Other options

● Phase capex spend to maintain flexibility

● Reduce capex and enhance project NPV

● Cost optimisation

Options

● Various sources of funding include:

• Bank loans (local and international)

• Bond markets (local and international)

• Export Credit Agency funding

• Project finance

● Potential equity options

● Projects could be phased to reduce

gearing

● Potential loss of synergies

Considerations

● Debt more cost effective than equity

● Impact on credit rating and cost of funding

● Equity is an expensive funding option until

projects are commissioned

● Delays in process


strong track record of delivering consistent returns

0

2

4

6

0

10

20

30

2009 2010 2011 2012 1H13 % ZAR

Stable interim dividend

Interim Final Dividend yield (year-end)

0

10

20

30

40

2009 2010 2011 2012 1H12 1H13ZAR

Growth in earnings per share

Earnings per share Dividend per share

1. Source: Bloomberg 31 December 2009 to 31 December 2012, assuming dividends are reinvested in securities

Rand TSR1 29%


delivering leading dividend yield vs. peer indices

Sasol’s dividend yield compares favorably on historic basis

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

Sasol MSCI EM Energy MSCI World energy JSE Resi 10 JSE Top 40 JSE Top 10

Historic dividend yield FY12

Source: Bloomberg market data as at 14 March 2013


growing shareholder value sustainably

growing

shareholder

value

sustainably

Robust investment

decision making

Strong track record

of delivering superior

shareholder returns

Solid strategic

capital allocation process

Focused on managing

long-term gearing

questions

and answers

our North

American

priorities David E. Constable



the home of our US growth projects

Lake Charles

Lake Charles


top management line of sight

Sasol Limited

board

CEO/GEC

Mandating

committee

Project sponsor

Executive

committee

US GTL

project team

Steering

committee

Technical contract

approval committee

LCCP

project team IPMT


priority areas to drive project progress

in the near term

guiding principles

● Appoint the best people for the job at hand

● Ensure robust Integrated Project Management Team with world-class project

controls and management systems

● Leverage industry best practices and lessons learned

• Mindset of zero scope changes post-EPC award

• Single point of accountability

• A robust yet flexible contracting strategy

• Quality of agreements, incentives and relationships with contractors paramount

• Better market intelligence than contractors and competitors

• Create independent key craft labour strategy


Financing

Technology

Feedstock

Market

Capability


technology and feedstock

robust

project

economics









case?


capability?



Financing

Technology

Feedstock

Market

Capability


market and capability

robust

project

economics









case?


capability?


our North

American value

proposition –

technology and

feedstock Lean Strauss

Senior Group Executive:

international energy, new business

development and technology

technology


gas to liquids(GTL) in a nutshell

Product work-up

10 mcf 1 barrel of product

1 bcf/d 100 000 bbl/day

1 tcf reserve 100 million bbl of products Over 30 years

GTL synthesis Reforming Natural gas

as feedstock

Diesel: 75%

Naphtha: 20%

LPG: 5%

GTL products


ORYX Qatar, Sasol’s GTL flagship

● A joint venture with Qatar Petroleum

● A total of 45+ million barrels produced to date

• 32 400 bbl/d nameplate capacity

● Some key performance indicators from 2012:

• Zero RCR

• Six months production in excess of design capacity

• Nine months at 99%+ on-line availability

● Technology proven and feedstock conversion target exceeded


● Joint venture with Chevron + NNPC

● 32 400 bbl/d – Oryx look alike

● Beneficial operation: December 2013

● Joint venture with Uzbekneftegaz + Petronas

● 38 400 bbl/d – enhanced Oryx

● Decision to proceed – 2nd half 2013

other GTL projects in the pipeline

Escravos GTL, Nigeria OLTIN YO’L GTL, Uzbekistan


● Across the fence utility

supply

● Modularisation

● Partnerships and alliances

● Chemicals

● Electricity

● Base oils

● Reactor intensification

● Generation 3 FT catalyst

● Improvement in reforming

technology

identified various levers to extract greater value

5-7% improvement in IRR targeted

Improving

capital

productivity

Driving

technology

improvement Improving

product

value


scale up and intensification of GTL reactor

● Significant scale-up during successful

commercialisation at ORYX GTL

● Subsequent focus on intensification to

increase production in essentially the

same shell

● Enabled by:

• Integrated catalyst and reactor

technology developments

• Intensive fundamental studies,

model systems and semi-commercial

piloting

• Understanding critical design

parameters and margins based on

commercial operation – enabled

significant optimisation

● US GTL design at 150% of ORYX GTL

reactor capacity

feedstock


not only shale gas, but also shale ethane has changed

North American energy and chemical markets

estimates vary from 40-100 years of supply

Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2011

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

US

dry

ga

s (

trill

ion

cu

bic

fe

et p

er

ye

ar)

2009 History Projections

11%

14%

20%

9%

28%

8% 2% 9%

Net imports

Shale gas

Non-associated onshore

Non-associated offshore

Tight gas

Coal-bed methane Alaska

Associated with oil

1%

45%

8%

8%

22%

7% 1% 7%


the US GTL opportunity is advantaged by

favourable oil/gas price ratios

0

10

20

30

40

1992 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037

Crude oil (Brent) prices expressed as a multiple of natural gas prices (Henry Hub)

actual EIA (2013)

● More than 400 tcf of

gas in the US can be

commercially produced

at <$6/mmbtu

● All reputable long-term

energy consultants

forecast Henry Hub in a

USD 4-6/mmbtu range

(real ‘12)

● Oil/gas price differential

forecast to remain

favourable


Montney shale gas – a feedstock hedge for US GTL

● A 50:50 Joint venture with Talisman in British Columbia

● Drilling and completion costs coming down – approaching investment assumptions

● 129 mcf/d average (gross) production for 2012

● Montney gas production to provide ~ 2/3 feedstock price cover for GTL investment in US

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035 2037 2039 2041 2043 2045

mm

cf/

day

Sasol Montney

gas production

US GTL

consumption


Standalone Integrated

integrated gas and GTL economics in North America

Integrated economics between Montney and GTL robust

eco

no

mic

va

lue

- N

PV

Henry Hub gas price

eco

no

mic

va

lue

- N

PV

Henry Hub gas price

US GTL Montney

integrated:

US GTL +

Montney

US GTL

Montney gas

provides risk cover

in higher gas scenario


GTL a compelling value proposition in Lake Charles

● Phased approach after ethane cracker

● Value indicators

• Capacity (nameplate): +96 kbpd

• Gas requirement: 9 - 9,5 mmbtu

per barrel product

• Capital range ($11-$14bn, including

value adds)

• Operating cost: < $20/bbl

• Economics further enhanced by

attractive incentives

● GTL exceeds hurdle on standalone

basis

● Chemical products make a significant

incremental contribution to GTL value

proposition

GTL

Diesel

Naphtha and LPG

Paraffin cuts and LAB

Wax products

Synthetic base oils

96 000 bbl/d Fuels

Chemical value adds

~ 43%

~ 29%

~ 28%


● Arbitraging gas and oil - shale

gas revolution

● Technology enhancements -

extending our lead

● World class products

● Chemical value adds

● Integrated value chain

● World class infrastructure

● Supportive government

● Access to multiple markets

● Competitive labour and

contractor market

● Abundant feedstock

in summary

GTL value proposition Lake Charles

compelling

investment

opportunity

our North

American value

proposition –

market and

capability André de Ruyter

Senior Group Executive:

global chemicals and

North American operations

market


ethane associated with gas leads to global

leadership position for US crackers

Source: CMAI

Position in bottom 30% on a cash cost basis


low market risk

Lake Charles Chemical Project gives backward-integrated growth for Sasol into

a well-established and uniquely diversified market

Balanced portfolio of commodity and differentiated products

Ethane

Cracker

Ziegler

Alcohol

TET

LLDPE

Ethoxylates

Guerbet

Alcohols

MEG

To existing ETO

ETO sales

Guerbet sales

Alcohol sales

Alumina

1-Octene

LLDPE

Ethane

Crude C3s

Crude C4s

Light Pygas

Heavy pygas

1-Hexene

LDPE LDPE

External Alcohol

Oxygen Ethylene

Oxide/MEG*

External Alcohol

Ethylene

Ethylene


prudent long term oil price view supported

by fundamentals

Marginal cost of production = about $90 per barrel

80

100

120

140

160

180

FY11 FY14 FY17 FY20 FY23 FY26 FY29

No

min

al o

il p

rice

US

$/b

bl

Oil price – long-term panel comparison


GTL sells diesel, not crude oil…

Diesel prices in the US are linked to international prices

129,8

128,7

130,2

132,6

126,2

129,2

Average oil prices in 2012:

● Brent: $111,6/bbl

● WTI: $ 94,2/bbl

Source: Platts


US GTL product marketing

● A balanced product portfolio of 29% chemicals and 71% fuels (by mass)

natural gas

reforming

sasol LTFT

process

wax

extraction

paraffin

extraction

fuels

product

work - up

Process *

oxygen

natural

gas

syngas

reactor wax

condensate

Paraffin for LAB production

natural gas

reforming

sasol LTFT

process

paraffin

extraction

fuels

product

work - up

Process * syngas

reactor wax

condensate

wax products

LPG

naphtha

diesel

paraffins

LPG

naphtha

diesel

base oils base oils

ph

as

e 1

p

ha

se

2 oxygen

natural

gas

a Sasol wholly-owned facility with a nameplate capacity of +96 000 bbl/d

debottleneck in

Hamburg,

Germany

four new

emulsification

units

new LAB unit in

Lake Charles

minor

modifications in

Augusta, Italy

* flexible design allows for operation in fuels only or value adds mode


our key markets and products

improving the competitiveness of Sasol’s current global business

Value chain Feedstock

Technology/

production

platform Market

C₂ > Polyethylene

C₂ > Co-monomers

C₂ > Alcohols

Paraffin > LAB

Wax

Base oils/lubricants

GTL diesel

Fair position Good position Strong position

Feedstock

Technology/

production

platform Market

Current Future

No position

capability


proactive actions to address execution challenges

Recent mega-project

experience in the Gulf

Coast

Contracting strategies

Labour availability and

productivity

● Utilization of

standard

designs where

possible

● Disciplined

stage-gate

discipline to

control change

during design

evolution

● Extended FEED

programme to

allow sufficient

time to complete

designs prior to

construction

● Integrated project management team

● Sasol and expert contractor members

● Leverage local mega-project expertise and

execution

● Holistic review of feasible contracting options and

defined contracting strategies

● Comprehensive contractor scan and development

effort to ensure most competitive pool of qualified

EPCs

● Current preference for FEED contracts is a

converted lump sum approach

● Detailed market analysis of key labour

supply/demand balances, productivity and labour

rates

● Market intelligence and resource planning

● Modularization strategies

Mitigation


actions to mitigate similar risks and apply

best practices

mega-project experience

● In process to contract with

• A global construction company, with relevant US

Gulf Coast experience

• A global engineering and construction

management company with GTL and lump sum

credentials

● Experienced IPMT*

• ‘Salt and pepper’ team under Sasol’s leadership

- Sasol South Africa and Sasol North America

employees

- Local US Gulf contractor experts

- Local/Sasol expat split 75%/25%

• Members selected for relevant experience

• Independent

- No execution responsibilities, thus no conflict of

interest

- Own FEED and EPC management control systems

* IPMT: mega-project experience

IPMT schematic for illustrative purposes


addressing execution risks

building on prior experience

● Construction will not commence until well-defined design targets have been achieved

● Access to partners’ systems to enable tracking of costs and schedule independent of

engineering contractors

● Scope for FEED is frozen

● Alleviating craft shortage by moving certain activities off site through modularization

● Utilization of known technologies

● Leveraging of world class suppliers (e.g. Oxygen OTF, electricity co-generation)

● Utilization of local employees and contractors with in-country experience

● Careful study and review of lessons learnt executing megaprojects at Sasol and by others

● Experienced, well-resourced integrated owner team

with participation of independent reputable industry partners


extending the GTL schedule

will reduce risk

● Advancing project definition past typical end of FEED

(30%) to between 40% and 50%, would improve

estimate accuracy by ~10%

● 10% on a US$6,5bn EPC cost could equate to

a US$650m improvement in accuracy

● Delay engagement of EC and give

better definition for FEED kickoff of:

• External license packages,

OOTF and co-generation

definition

● Greater project scope and design

definition at time of FID

• Reduced execution risk and

narrows the band for EPC cost

by extending FEED

• Less potential of scope growth

• Support more accurate prices

from market (e.g. lump sum)

● Consideration of alternative

contracting strategies

Source: Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International

project definition drives estimate accuracy


modularization mitigates shortage of skills

LCCP modularization study (feasibility)

Module Yard Craft Peak

Site Personnel (with modularization)

Site Personnel (without modularization)


favourable location enables modularization

MATERIALSLABORHEAVY HAULRAILROAD

EV

ER

GR

EE

N R

D

MATERIAL OFF-LOADINGFACILITY

PotentialModule

Laydown Area

I-10

SULPHUR ROAD


in summary

● Good positioning of products

● Well-established and uniquely diversified

market

● Balanced portfolio of commodity and

differentiated products

Market

● Experienced, well-resourced integrated

owner team

● Participation of independent reputable

industry partners

● Lessons learned executing mega-projects

at Sasol and by others

Capability

ORYX GTL, Qatar Lake Charles, Louisiana

closing remarks David E. Constable



LCCP business drivers

to create meaningful and profitable growth by capitalising on abundant and

low-cost US ethane supplies

● Establish an ethylene-based chemicals facility with a balanced product portfolio

● Unique products and established market position

● Maintain the strategic position in alcohols and ethoxylates

● Maintain the strategic position in octene and grow market share

● Replace divested production and grow polymers global footprint within existing portfolio

● Create a sustainable competitive advantage by positioning ourselves in the lower third of the

global ethylene cash cost curve

● Produce current tolled ethylene oxide thereby improving cost base, operations, safety and

sustainability


US GTL business drivers

the US holds significant fuels and chemical growth opportunities

for Sasol and supports our strategic objectives

● Favourable US natural gas market dynamics

● Security of feedstock supply

● Sasol’s GTL and value-add technologies - unique products and established market position

● Existing asset and resource base in North America

● Integration synergies with the LCCP

● Enable Sasol to enter a lucrative and quickly developing premium base oils market

● One of the lowest cost paraffin and LAB value chains globally

● Allow production of high quality waxes to support differentiation strategy


revisiting our investment considerations

robust project economics remain cornerstone of our investment decisions

Financing

Technology

Feedstock

Market

Capability

robust

project

economics

● Prioritised portfolio

● Managing balance sheet within gearing target

● Good market appetite for Sasol debt

● Record performance levels at ORYX GTL

● Superior technology value proposition

● Utilisation of proven technologies

● Well-established and uniquely diversified market

● Good market positioning of products

● Balanced portfolio of commodity and

differentiated products

● Experienced, well-resourced team

● Independent, reputable industry partners

● Lessons learned executing mega-projects

● Abundant low-cost feedstock supply

● Volume and price feedstock cover for

GTL investment

questions

and answers

informal lunch

investor strategy presentation - sasol...investor strategy presentation new york: 9 april 2013 cape...

Documents