Analysis

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) gave HeidelbergCement permission to complete its acquisition of Italcementi assets in the US on 17 June 2016. This was the second and final major competition body that could have challenged the purchase, following approval by the European Commission in late May 2016. Although the FTC consent now faces a month for comment the deal is looking likely to complete towards the end of the summer.

HeidelbergCement and Italcementi have gotten away with having to sell just one cement plant and 11 terminals in the US. The Lafarge-Holcim merger in 2015 had it tougher. Those companies were forced to sell two cement plants, two slag grinding plant and a host of terminals. Admittedly LafargeHolcim is now the biggest cement producer in the US (and the world) but HeidelbergCement will hold more integrated cement plants in the US following its acquisition.

As predicted the FTC took exception with the proximity of the company’s assets in West Virginia and Pennsylvania following the acquisition. So the parties have agreed to sell the Essroc Martinsburg integrated cement plant in West Virginia. When Global Cement visited the plant in late 2013 the staff told us that cement from the plant was distributed from central Ohio eastwards to western Pennsylvania and south to southern Virginia. The plant also switched over to a FLSmidth dry production line in 2010 giving it a clinker production capacity of 1.6Mt/yr, making it one of the newer plants in the Essroc stable.

The FTC also flagged up competition concerns in five metropolitan areas: Baltimore-Washington, DC; Richmond, Virginia; Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, Virginia; Syracuse, New York; and Indianapolis, Indiana. In light of this the proposed consent agreement requires the merged company to divest seven Essroc terminals in Maryland, Virginia and Pennsylvania and a Lehigh terminal in Solvay, New York. Two additional Essroc terminals in Columbus and Middlebranch, Ohio are to be sold at the option of the buyer and subject to FTC approval. Finally, Essroc’s terminal in Indianapolis is to be sold to Cemex.

Funnily enough, the FTC took about a year to approve both the merger of Lafarge and Holcim and HeidelbergCement’s purchase of Italcementi. This compares to the European Commission which took nine months to approve the Lafarge-Holcim deal but which took 11 months to clear the HeidelbergCement-Italcementi one. Given the greater overlap of assets of the Lafarge-Holcim merger in both Europe and the US one might have thought that the approval process would have taken longer. Or maybe bureaucracy moves at a speed all of its own. Read into this what you will. The creation of the world’s second largest multinational cement producer draws closer.

A Sinoma subsidiary was raking in the big bucks this week with the announcement that it had booked a Euro1.05bn order with the Egyptian government. The order was for six 6000t/day cement production lines plus assorted maintenance contracts from Chengdu Design and Research Institute of Building Materials Industry (CDI).

The order caps a busy month for Sinoma. At the start of June, another subsidiary, CBMI, said that it had picked up deals to build two new lines in Algeria for Groupe des Ciments d’Algérie. Around the same time another project in the country, a joint venture between Lafarge Algeria and Souakri Group, revealed that it had started commissioning its mill. Other assorted cement projects announced so far in 2016 include a waste heat recovery unit for Thai Pride Cement in Thailand, a conversion to coal burning at South Valley Cement in Egypt and various orders for mills via Loesche for Sinoma projects in Vietnam.

The scale of that latest Egyptian order becomes apparent when one looks at Sinoma, or China National Materials Group Corporation’s, annual results. It reported revenue of US$8.08bn in 2015, a slight decrease from US$8.38bn in 2014. Those six lines represent 13% of the group’s entire turnover in 2015. That’s one humongous order. The last time Sinoma signed a cement deal on this magnitude was in August 2015 when Nigerai’s Dangote placed an order at a value of US$1.49bn.

Elsewhere on the balance sheet for 2015, its profit fell markedly by 25% year-on-year to US$150m from US$200m. However, its new order intake grew by 14% to US$5.1bn. Overseas orders accounted for over three quarters of this or US$4.32bn, its highest level on record. This compares to its rival FLSmidth’s new order intake of US$2.8bn in 2015. It declared that it would continue to seek business outside of China in line with the country’s ‘One belt, one road’ policy focusing on Central Asia and South America.

This growth by Chinese engineering companies on the world stage may have been stymied in 2015. The Verband Deutscher Maschinen- und Anlagenbau (VDMA) in Germany reported in April 2016 that the members of its Industrial Plant Manufacturers’ Group (AGAB) had booked orders of Euro19.5bn in 2015, a similar figure to its orders in 2014. This compared to a drop of 63% of large plant orders (not just cement) in 2014 from Euro5.29bn in 2013. AGAB saw opportunity in service industries for its German members as markets stalled in Russia and Brazil, and China’s property market faced its own problems. Research by UBS Evidence Lab, as reported by the Financial Times in May 2016, has taken a different view, suggesting that Chinese construction quarry equipment manufacturers such as Sany, Zoomlion and XCMG were likely to expand their market share outside of China to 15% by 2025. At present the research pegged them at 7%.

Expansion comes with its risks though. In late May 2016 Sinoma International Engineering reported details of a tax dispute it was suffering in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi subsidiary of the company was levelled with a request for unpaid back taxes from 2006 and 2008. At the time it was appealing against a bill of US$18m. In a changing global marketplace some things never change. Global success it seems is taxed.

When a small cement market sits just off the coast of one of the world’s biggest producers, it’s not a recipe for a lot of column inches. Sri Lanka’s cement market, is particularly small, ranked 128th out of 141 clinker producing nations according to the Global Cement Top 100 Report 2015, and is dwarfed by a very dominant neighbour in India. Therefore, when two stories about plant projects and divestments came in from Sri Lanka this week, our interest was suitably piqued.

The first story came from global giant LafargeHolcim, which announced the planned divestment of its 0.6Mt/yr integrated Holcim Lanka plant at Puttalam, its 1.0Mt/yr grinding plant in Galle and associated packing facilities. The second story came from South Korea’s AFKO Group GMEX (AFKO), which has expressed strong intentions to reopen the Kankesanthurai plant in the north of the country.

LafargeHolcim stated that its move was part of its wider divestment strategy following the 2015 merger of Lafarge and Holcim. Considering that the company currently controls 1.6Mt/yr of Sri Lanka’s 3.6Mt/yr cement capacity (around 44%) the potential ramifications are big - A huge position is up for grabs.

Local newspaper The Nation stated that three locally-owned groups were already circling the assets as of Saturday 4 June 2016, but it’s still early days. A major player could easily step in to grab some high-quality assets in this rapidly-growing market, which grew by 4.5% in 2014 and is investing strongly in infrastructure. With its recent history or major purchases, CRH could certainly be interested. Larger Indian and Pakistani players, stifled by continued overcapacity at home, could also be in line to snap up the assets.

Up in the north, the AFKO project sounds massive. It could also have large implications for the shape of the Sri Lankan cement sector but there is a lot of work to be done. The Kankesanthurai plant produced its last cement in 1991 as the civil war raged in the north of Sri Lanka. It had a capacity of just 0.12Mt/yr at that time. However, AFKO chairman Keun Young Lee stated that the company was, “Ready to enter with US$450m as a start.” This is far more than the amount needed to re-start a small, presumably wet process cement plant. The amount strongly suggests an entire new, state-of-the-art facility, but no capacity has been announced.

AFKO sounds very serious but other projects have previously run into trouble on the island. A restart at Kankesanthurai has previously been mooted twice, once by a domestic player and once by a company from the UAE. Meanwhile Thatta Cement has suspended construction of a US$15m, 0.1Mt/yr grinding plant at Rajapaksa, Hambantota. It will be very interesting to see how the AFKO project develops over the coming months – It will also be seeing how the eventual price-tag for the project compares with the revenue that LafargeHolcim raises from its own divestment.

While Sri Lanka remains a small player, its cement sector is very similar to that of India when we take populations into account. Both have room for expansion. India has 310Mt/yr (according to the Global Cement Directory 2016) but, with a population of over 1.25 billion, it has a per-capita capacity of around 250kg/capita. Sri Lanka, with 3.6Mt/yr of capacity and 20.2 million inhabitants, comes in at just under 200kg/capita. There is clearly room for growth in both of these figures and further projects could yet be on the horizon for Sri Lanka. If they play their cards right, AFKO and the successful bidder for the LafargeHolcim assets could be in a great position to benefit from the island’s strong continued growth.

Eurocement owner Filaret Galchev has been surprisingly candid on Russian television this week commenting on why his company offloaded shares in LafargeHolcim in February 2016. He described the move as ‘unexpected’ and a reaction to the shares losing nearly half their value in six months.

Eurocement ran a repurchase deal for the stake with Sberbank in late January 2016 before the bank sold it in early February 2016. Galchev’s wallet wasn’t the only casualty of LafargeHolcim’s falling share price. Board chairman Wolfgang Reitzle announced his plans to resign from the company at about the same time. LafargeHolcim’s share price has since rallied somewhat although it remains well below the level it commanded in the summer of 2015 following the merger.

Back on Russia, Galchev also continued Eurocement’s theme of predicting doom and gloom for the domestic cement industry. He forecast a further drop of up to 10% in local demand for cement. This is in line with previous comments Eurocement has made since at least about mid-2015. Although on the plus side the steepness of the fall in demand may be softening at least.

Graph 1 – Cement production in Russia, 2011 – 2015.

As the data above from the Russian Federal State Statistics Service (ROSSTAT) shows, cement production in Russia fell by 9% year-on-year to 62.1Mt in 2015 from 68.5Mt. This follows years of growth. Data for the first four months of 2016 seemed to show an acceleration of this trend with an 18% drop in production to 8.9Mt for the first three months of the year. However, the latest released figures, for April 2016, show that production may be picking up somewhat. We won’t get a better idea until the middle of the year. On the supply side, ROSSTAT doesn’t release any figures on cement consumption but the Russian railways were have reported that their cement volumes to consumers were down by 9.2% to 4.8Mt in the first quarter of 2016. This is a percentage drop close to what Filaret Galchev has been suggesting for 2016 as a whole.

The news from the multinationals supports this picture. LafargeHolcim reported weak construction markets in the first quarter of 2016 following sharp declines in 2015. HeidelbergCement recorded ‘slight’ decreases in its sales volumes in the period. It also noted a knock-on effect in Sweden due to lowering export deliveries to Russia.

All in all it’s a similar picture to fellow BRIC country Brazil, which we covered last week, with falling commodity prices hammering the economy and the local industry battening down the hatches. However, international oil prices are slowly creeping up and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has predicted lower decreases in its economic output in 2016. Perhaps Filaret Galchev will have some good news to talk about on Russian television sooner than he thinks.

LafargeHolcim has officially opened a new cement line at its Barossa cement plant in Brail. It is unfortunate timing given that the Brazilian cement industry has not had an easy time of it of late. The wider economy in the country has been in recession since it was hit by falling commodity and oil prices and gross domestic product (GDP) fell by 3.8% in 2015. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has predicted currently that the GDP will fall by a similar amount in 2016. Alongside this, the Petrobras corruption inquiry has enveloped construction companies and led to the suspension of president of Dilma Rousseff. The Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE) reported that the national construction industry contracted by 7.6% in 2015.

Graph 1: Brazilian cement production from 2011 to 2015. Source: SNIC.

Graph 2: Brazilian cement production by quarter from 2015 to March 2016. Source: SNIC.

Graph 1 summarises, with National Union of the Cement Industry (SNIC) data, what happened to cement production in 2015. It fell by 9.6% to 64.4Mt in 2015 from 71.3Mt in 2014. Unfortunately, as Graph 2 shows, the downward production trend is accelerating into 2016. Production fell by 5.76% year-on-year to 15.6Mt in the first quarter of 2015 from 17.1Mt in the first quarter of 2014. Now, production has fallen by 11% to 13.9Mt in the first quarter of 2016. April 2016 figures also appear to be following the same trend.

Amidst these conditions Votorantim somehow managed to hold its cement business revenue up; increasing it by 6% to US$3.82bn in 2015. Despite this its cement sales volumes fell by 6% to 35Mt. As a result, Votorantim announced plans to temporarily shutdown kilns and plants and sell off selected concrete assets. Cimento Tupi reported that its cement and clinker sales volumes fell by 23% to 1631Mt in 2015 from 2119Mt in 2014. It blamed the fall of the ‘retraction’ of the cement market and a wide-scale maintenance campaign it had implemented on its kilns. Its revenue fell by 26% to US$98.8m from US$134m.

LafargeHolcim pulled no punches when it blamed challenging conditions in Brazil for dragging its financial results down globally in 2015. It didn’t release any specific figures for the country but it described its cement volumes as falling ‘significantly’ with competition and cost inflation adding to the chaos. This has gotten worse in the first quarter of 2016 with volumes further affected. Its cement sales volumes in Latin America fell by 10.7% year-on-year for the period principally due to Brazil. Companhia Siderúrgica Nacional (CSN) has reported an 8% rise in production to 531,000t in the first quarter of 2016 and an 8% rise in sales volumes to 571,000t in the same period. This was partly achieved by the ramp-up of production at its new plant at Arcos in Minas Gerais.

In the wider cement supplier sector the knock-on from falling cement demand has hit refractory manufacturer Magnesita. Its revenue fell by 17% year-on-year to US$66.9m for the first quarter of 2016. This was due to falling steel production in various territories and the negative effects of the construction market in Brazil hurting its cement customers.

It is unsurprising that companies like LafargeHolcim commissioned new capacity in Brail a few years ago given the promise the market seemed to hold. Both the CSN project at Arcos and Holcim’s Barroso project were announced in 2012 near the height of the market. Both are also based in Minas Gerais, the country’s biggest cement producing state. Predicting both the drop in the international commodities markets and a local political crisis would have been hard to predict. All these producers can do now is sit back and wait out the situation with their efficiency gains until the construction rates pick up again. Hopefully the first quarter results for Brazil’s two leading cement producers, Votorantim and InterCement, will not be too depressing.