In the span of just 18 months, BHP Group, the world’s largest mining company, has twice attempted and twice walked away from acquiring Anglo American. The first failure came in May 2024 after a protracted $49 billion bid war.
The second collapse happened in November 2025, ending almost as quickly as it began.
While headlines focus on the “walk-away” narrative, the true story lies in the hidden costs—both tangible and intangible—that BHP has accumulated through these failed pursuits. From opportunity costs and reputational damage to strategic paralysis, the real price tag extends far beyond the billions that were never spent.
The 2024 Saga: A $49 Billion Bid That Never Was
In May 2024, BHP launched a bid for Anglo American valued at $49 billion, seeking to boost its copper holdings—the metal essential for the green energy transition.
The strategic logic was compelling: the combined entity would have been the world’s largest copper producer with annual production of around 1.9 million metric tons.
BHP made three separate offers, each progressively higher. The final offer valued Anglo American at approximately £38.6 billion, but each proposal included a fatal flaw: a highly complex structure requiring Anglo to complete two separate demergers of its entire shareholdings in Anglo American Platinum and Kumba Iron Ore prior to the takeover.
This unprecedented structure proved to be BHP’s undoing. Anglo American’s board highlighted that undertaking two contemporaneous demergers of publicly listed companies alongside a takeover was unprecedented and would result in material regulatory approvals that could impose conditions disproportionately impacting value.
On May 29, 2024, BHP walked away, citing inability to reach agreement on regulatory risk and cost in South Africa, where Anglo was founded and remains of significant national importance. The timing was particularly sensitive, coinciding with South Africa’s general elections.
The 2025 Attempt: A Short-Lived Return
Just when the industry thought BHP had moved on, the mining giant made a fresh takeover approach in November 2025, proposing a mix of cash and stock.
This came after Anglo American announced in September 2025 a $53 billion all-share merger with Teck Resources that would create the world’s fifth-largest copper producer.
The bid was designed to disrupt the Anglo-Teck combination, but it lasted mere days. The swiftness of the rejection suggests Anglo American’s board had no appetite for entertaining another BHP bid—particularly when they had a viable alternative already on the table.
An analyst at RBC noted that while BHP may have wanted to assess if the option was open, it looked “a little messy from the BHP side.”
The True Costs: Beyond the Headlines
Direct Financial Costs
While the actual acquisition never happened, BHP incurred substantial costs. Major investment banks and law firms, multiple rounds of due diligence, regulatory filing fees, and thousands of executive hours diverted from other strategic priorities all add up.
Conservative estimates suggest BHP spent $200-300 million in direct costs across both failed attempts—money spent with nothing to show for it.
Opportunity Cost: The Copper That Got Away
This is perhaps the most painful cost. While BHP pursued Anglo, the copper landscape shifted dramatically. Since BHP’s first offer in April 2024, Anglo’s share price has risen 18 percent, while BHP’s has declined 11 percent.
More significantly, the Anglo-Teck merger will create the world’s fifth-largest copper producer with annual copper production of 1.2 million tonnes expected to grow to approximately 1.35 million tonnes in 2027. BHP now faces a more formidable competitor in the copper market.
The combined entity could eventually surpass BHP’s Escondida mine as the world’s leading copper producer once operations reach full capacity in the early 2030s.
Strategic Paralysis
From April 2024 to November 2025, BHP’s M&A strategy was effectively frozen. Under UK takeover rules, after withdrawing from a bid, BHP was required to stay away for at least six months.
During this 18-month period, other potential acquisition targets may have been pursued by competitors, market conditions changed, and alternative growth strategies were put on hold.
Reputational Damage
Perhaps most damaging is the perception that BHP’s approach has been inefficient and poorly executed.
Questions emerged about whether management properly assessed structural and regulatory challenges before launching the bids. For a company that prides itself on operational excellence, this reputational cost may linger for years.
What BHP Got Right: The Discipline to Walk Away
Despite these substantial costs, BHP deserves credit for one crucial decision: walking away when the deal didn’t make sense.
Industry observers expressed relief that BHP didn’t overpay, noting that mining companies have a poor track record with big acquisitions and tend to destroy value when they get overexcited.
Mike Henry, BHP’s CEO, has consistently emphasized capital discipline, stating that it’s difficult to find the right combination between commodities the company wants and asset quality it desires, at a cost that would still allow BHP to unlock value for shareholders.
The Alternative Path: Organic Growth
Having failed twice to acquire Anglo American, BHP has pivoted to an organic growth strategy focused on copper.
The company now has four big copper growth basins: the Vicuna joint venture with Lundin Mining in Argentina, the US Resolution tie-up with Rio Tinto, Escondida in Chile, and South Australian copper operations.
BHP plans to invest between $10 billion and $14 billion at a capital intensity of $23,000 per tonne of copper equivalent in Chile.
At Escondida, the world’s largest copper mine, BHP is constructing a new concentrator expected to produce between 220,000 and 260,000 tonnes annually from 2031-32, with estimated capital expenditure of $4.4 billion to $5.9 billion.
BHP’s analysis showed that prevailing copper producer market valuations sit at a capital intensity equivalent of $50,000 per tonne, leading CEO Mike Henry to suggest that opportunities to create value through acquisitions of current producing assets look less attractive.
In contrast, BHP’s internal copper growth options appear more economically attractive at $15,000-33,000 per tonne.
Anglo’s Winning Strategy
While BHP wrestled with failed acquisitions, Anglo American executed a masterful defensive strategy. Following BHP’s first bid, Anglo announced comprehensive restructuring to focus on copper, iron ore, and crop nutrients—divesting platinum, diamonds, nickel, and coal assets.
The merger with Teck, described as a “zero-premium” merger of equals, will create a company with more than 70 percent exposure to copper.
The companies estimate annual pretax synergies of $800 million, with up to $1.4 billion in EBITDA gains through shared procurement and operational efficiencies.
An analyst at Panmure Liberum called the merger a “significant coup” for Anglo American, noting that if successful, they’re locking up high-quality copper assets that the industry has been coveting.
By pivoting from defense to offense, Anglo transformed itself from takeover target to strategic buyer—all without paying a premium.
The Verdict
Let’s tally the final scorecard. BHP spent $200-300 million in direct costs, faced substantial opportunity costs as Anglo-Teck emerged as a major competitor, endured 18 months of strategic limbo, experienced significant share price volatility, and suffered ongoing reputational damage.
However, BHP avoided overpaying for a complex, risky structure, maintained balance sheet strength, and developed a robust organic growth strategy with attractive capital intensity. While the company avoided the trap of a bad deal, the costs were substantial.
Yet by pivoting to organic growth, BHP may ultimately look back on these failed bids as expensive lessons that led to a better long-term strategy.
The company now focuses on projects with superior economics compared to acquisition multiples, potentially creating more sustainable value.
Conclusion
BHP’s pursuit of Anglo American will be remembered as one of mining’s most expensive near-misses. While the $49 billion price tag never materialized, the true cost—measured in fees, opportunity, reputation, and strategic paralysis—may ultimately exceed $1 billion when all factors are considered.
Yet paradoxically, by failing to complete these deals, BHP may have avoided an even costlier mistake.
The structural complexity, regulatory risks, and post-merger integration challenges could have destroyed far more value than the company ultimately spent.
As BHP now focuses on organic copper growth and Anglo-Teck prepares to combine, the mining industry moves forward with important lessons learned.
Sometimes the deals that don’t happen teach us more than the ones that do. The final question remains: will BHP’s organic growth strategy prove superior to the acquisition it never made, or will it look back with regret at the copper giant that got away—not once, but twice?
Only time will tell, but one thing is certain: in the world of mega-deals, walking away costs more than most people realize—even when it’s the right decision.
Also Read
The Great Tech Rotation: Why Bridgewater Just Dumped 65% of Its Nvidia Stake
The Fed’s December Dilemma: How Rate Cut Uncertainty Is Rattling Markets This Week
