Its chief executive has quit, it has announced an operating loss of �393m, its share price has collapsed and it may have to cut up to 3,000 jobs. BBC News Online explains what went wrong.

Hasn't Corus already shed most of its workforce?

The company has cut around 6,000 jobs over the past three years as it struggles to cope with falling global demand.

But despite giving the impression of being in almost terminal decline, steel remains a major industry in the UK.

Corus employs 26,000 people and the UK remains the world's fourth biggest steel exporter.

Do we know which plants Corus wants to close?

The company is playing its cards very close to its chest.

It has said it is beginning consultations with the unions, but if past behaviour is anything to go by it will not give much away.

According to some analysts, Teesside and Scunthorpe would be more likely to go than Port Talbot.

The South Wales facility is probably the company's best asset, analysts say, as it has its own port and good processing facilities.

However, it is far from clear which plants will be closed.

Corus said there would be significant further capacity reductions and concentration of operations onto fewer sites in the UK.

The company's board is reviewing the business and Corus said the findings would be announced "as soon as possible".

How did the company get into this mess?

Corus has been hit by the double whammy of a high pound and a drop in domestic demand.

It was raking in profits in the mid-90s on the back of a weak exchange rate.

But analysts have accused it of failing to invest in its future while it had the chance.

And a botched take-over of Brazilian iron ore giant Companhia Siderurgica Nacional (CSN) last year only added to its woes.

What about the state of the world steel market?

Corus is certainly not alone in suffering from a slump in demand for steel.

The looming war in Iraq has seen to that, with China and other countries believed to be stockpiling supplies.

The US has also complicated the picture by slapping punitive tariffs on foreign steel in order to protect its domestic industry.

But that does not entirely explain Corus' �393m loss in 2002, which was, by most accounts, a relatively good year for steel.

As one analyst dryly put it: "Corus' achievement was quite spectacular in managing to lose money in 2002."

So what exactly is the problem?

Corus has been very good at marketing its products, particularly in the UK, and generating returns for shareholders.

But analysts have accused it of failing to have a coherent long-term strategy.

"It's the same old British story," one commented.

The merger with Dutch firm Hoogovens made sense on paper, but there has been a serious culture clash at management level.

Is that why the UK - and not the Netherlands - is bearing the brunt of redundancies?

Not really.

Sadly, for British workers, the only profitable parts of Corus are outside the UK.

And the Dutch board did not want to prop up the loss-making UK operation by selling off its most profitable assets.

That's why it blocked the sale of Corus' aluminium division. That move was upheld by the courts in Amsterdam.

Where does Corus go from here?

The only real option in the short-term is to cut capacity and hope for an upturn in demand.

But the signs are not good.

Some analysts have suggested that Corus could eventually split in two.

But in the current climate there would be few takers for a reborn British Steel.