Analysis

Cement producers appear to have doubled down on the lessons they learned in 2022 by seeking profits wherever they could in 2023, despite stagnant markets in certain key places. Even with sales volumes of cement going down for most of the multinational cement companies covered here, revenues and earnings rose through price rises or business realignment.

Heidelberg Materials can often be relied upon to sprinkle a bit less sugar on its financial commentary compared to some of its competitors. Thus it is always worth reflecting on what it says. In its view, “In 2023, high inflation rates across the globe, increased financing costs, and persistently high energy and raw material prices significantly impaired construction activity and thus demand for our building materials. The decline in demand in private residential construction, which was massive in some cases, could not be offset by a solid development in industrial commercial construction and infrastructure projects.” Other opinions are available.

Graph 1: Sales revenue from selected cement producers in 2022 and 2023. Source: Company reports. Note: Figures calculated for UltraTech Cement.

Heidelberg Materials is notably missing in Graph 2 (below), though as the company is likely to be holding back its cement sales volume numbers until it releases its full annual report for 2023 towards the end of March 2024. However, Holcim and Heidelberg Materials reached similar sales volumes of cement in 2022 and this looks likely to have continued in 2023, or even gone further. Holcim divested its India-based and Brazil-based operations in 2022 and Africa-based ones in South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda in 2023. Heidelberg Materials has also slimmed down, albeit at a slower pace, with the sale of its businesses in Southern Spain in 2022 and The Gambia in 2023. Note that CRH and Holcim have swapped places in terms of sales revenue from 2022 to 2023. 65% of CRH’s sales came from its Americas divisions.

The outlier here is UltraTech Cement. It increased its sales volumes as the India-based market continues to push forward. Dangote Cement, meanwhile, delivered a surprise with a fall in volumes, due to poor trading at home in Nigeria. Sales outside of Nigeria grew significantly though. A real key moment for the evolution of Dangote Cement as a multinational player will be when its sales, volumes and earnings outside of Nigeria surpass those from back home. It’s not there yet but it looks likely to happen in the next few years.

Graph 2: Cement sales volumes from selected cement producers in 2022 and 2023. Source: Company reports. Note: Figures calculated for CRH and UltraTech Cement.

The progress of the construction market in the US compared to elsewhere has wielded an outsized effect on balance sheets for companies. Signs of this have been apparent for several years but it really picked up in 2023 with CRH switching its primary listing to the US in September 2023 and then Holcim announcing that it is planning to spin-off its North American business (for more on this see GCW 645). Heidelberg Materials was asked during its analysts’ conference call for its 2023 financial results what its plans were for the US. Chair Dominik von Achten said he was against splitting the business off from the rest of the group but that all other options were on the table. Various media outlets have interpreted this to mean that an initial public offering in the US is a likely possibility.

What Cemex does with this situation, if anything, might be worth watching. The company is already North America-focused. Its key markets are in Mexico, the US and Europe, and it is already listed in Mexico and the US. Subsequently in 2023 the market in Mexico bounced back and operating earnings rose sharply in both Mexico and the US. Finally on this theme, Buzzi, the fifth largest cement producer in the US by capacity, may also face a similar dilemma to its peers about what to do with its largest earning business area.

The increasing dominance of the US market for western-based multinational cement producers may be accelerating a trend towards large regional companies everywhere. China-based cement players already dominate the top 10 list of the world’s largest cement producers by capacity. Companies from India and elsewhere are on the way to do likewise as they grow and concentrate on one geographic area. The situation in the US meanwhile is persuading the multinationals to do the same thing in reverse as they reconfigure themselves based on market demand. In financial terms, this may mean chasing growth in the US, learning to cope with high carbon prices in Europe or diversifying away from heavy building materials. Elsewhere, despite the proliferation of regional giants, such as the China-based cement companies, few seem keen to become truly multinational in a hurry, although opportunities, such as the ongoing sale of InterCement in Brazil or CRH’s acquisition of AdBri in Australia, are still present.

Global Cement Weekly will return to look at the large China-based cement companies when they release their financial results later in March 2024

InterCement confirmed this week that it is accepting bids for its sale. The local financial press had been covering InterCement’s progress towards this since the autumn when it was reported that it appointed BTG Pactual to manage the sale.

The Valor Econômico newspaper then revealed this week that Companhia Siderúrgica Nacional (CSN), Votorantim and China-based Huaxin Cement had all submitted bids. InterCement admitted that it had received offers but didn’t say from who, and pointed out that no deal had been signed yet. Valor said that Votorantim was part of a consortium including Polimix (parent company of Mizu Cimentos) and Buzzi. However, Votorantim issued a statement affirming its involvement but pointing out that it was acting alone and not part of a consortium. Finally, Valor reported that InterCement is looking to raise at least US$1.2bn from the sale of its business in Brazil. In Argentina, Loma Negra confirmed what its parent company, InterCement, was doing. La Nación newspaper also reckoned that the parent company might be looking for over US$700m for the subsidiary.

Rumours that InterCement was looking to sell assets have swirled around since the early 2010s when InterCement picked up the Brazil-based assets of Cimpor and Votorantim bought the international ones. The local market then collapsed giving InterCement a hard time, although when it started to rally in the late 2010s the talk turned to a potential initial public offering. More recently the focus has been on InterCement’s high level of debt and pending maturation dates. It publicly said it was working towards a new capital structure in May 2023 and various debt negotiations followed. By the end of the third quarter of 2023 it reported debts in debentures and senior notes of just under US$1.6bn. It signed a deal to sell its subsidiary in Egypt in January 2023 to an unspecified buyer and then divested its operations in Mozambique and South Africa to Huaxin Cement for just over US$230m in December 2023.

It is noteworthy that InterCement has gone public about its divestment intentions now, given previous coverage in the local press and the poor state of its finances in 2023. In November 2023, for example, Valor reported that CSN had hired Morgan Stanley to represent it in a dispute over the sale. At this time Huaxin Cement plus Titan, Buzzi, Polimix and Vicat were all said to be interested. CSN was also said to be waiting until the results of the presidential election in Argentina first before committing to any deal. Yet InterCement said nothing about what was going on at this time.

The other issue is whether InterCement wants to sell its assets in one big piece or in sections. This would be of particular interest to Votorantim, and CSN to a lesser extent, since they control 30% and 20% of the cement market respectively, according to Valor. Data based on cement production capacity data from the Global Cement Directory makes the gap between the two companies wider since Votorantim holds 46% compared to CSN’s 9%. The point here is that the local competition regulator, the Administrative Court of the Brazilian Administrative Council of Economic Defence (CADE), would be more likely to intervene if it determined that one company might be about to distort the market. Clearly this could happen if Votorantim struck a deal to buy InterCement but there might also be issues regionally with CSN or indeed some of the other local cement producers. Alternatively, Votorantim might be interested in buying Loma Negra instead. All InterCement has said on the matter is that it is “evaluating strategic alternatives, such as private placement, merger, or partnership with a strategic player, or even a potential divestment.”

Any potential sales of InterCement would be the biggest adjustment to the Brazilian cement sector since CSN bought Holcim Brazil for just over US$1bn in mid-2022. There appear to be plenty of potential vendors for both the businesses in Brazil and Argentina but whether InterCement sells its assets in one big lump or in separate pieces may be an issue almost as important as the price, given the competition concerns. Finally, could this be the first major China-based acquisition in the cement sector in South America? Huaxin Cement demonstrated willingness to buy plants from InterCement in Africa in 2023 and it has been linked in the current auction. Unlike previous talk of InterCement selling up, this time it seems serious given the divestments in Africa and the scale of the debt. An outcome seems likely in the coming months.

Valentine’s Day last week included some ‘hot’ news for the cement sector with the announcement that Electrified Thermal Solutions is preparing to build the first commercial-scale pilot of its Joule Hive thermal battery (JHTB) in San Antonio, Texas. The company is working with the Southwest Research Institute on the project along with Buzzi Unicem USA, 3M and Amy’s Kitchen as industrial partners. Advisors include Imerys. The project update follows the award of a US$5m grant from the US Department of Energy (DOE) in late January 2024.

The funding description from the DOE’s Industrial Efficiency & Decarbonization Office reports that the end goal is to “turn intermittent renewable electricity into constant industrial grade heat” that can replace fossil fuel usage. Electrified Thermal Solutions aims to test its JHTB thermal energy storage system, which uses electrically conductive refractory bricks, to convert and store electricity as heat at temperatures higher than 1700°C. The JHTB power ranges between 1 - 200MW of thermal output, with duration up to tens of hours, enabling ‘very affordable’ high temperature energy storage and on-demand heat. Notably, it can charge and discharge simultaneously, allowing a continuous heat supply.

Electrified Thermal Solutions is not alone in targeting the cement sector. As Global Cement Weekly has covered previously energy storage is a growing topic of interest with a few large-scale electrical battery units running at cement plants in Pakistan and Taiwan. The other big name in thermal batteries for cement production is Rondo Energy. Both Electrified Thermal Solutions and Rondo Energy are using modular three-dimensional arrays of refractory bricks to store thermal energy and then release it, although they are likely to have key proprietary differences. However, Rondo Energy appears to be further along the industrial adoption process so far. Titan Cement and Siam Cement Group (SCG) invested in Rondo Energy in 2022. Then in July 2023 SCG and Rondo Energy said that they were planning to expand the production capacity of a heat battery storage unit at an SCG plant from 2.4 GWh/yr in mid-2023 to 90GWh/yr. For more information on Rondo Energy read the feature by CEO John O’Donnell in the January 2023 issue of Global Cement Magazine.

The reason that this matters, as partly explained above, is that fossil fuels contribute about one third of the CO₂ emissions created by heating up the kiln in cement production to make clinker. This is dropping globally due to the uptake of alternative fuels, but burning alternative fuels emits gross CO₂, however you account for the emissions. Mass adoption of thermal batteries by the sector could potentially cut out this double-accounting and reduce that third down to the carbon footprint of the refractory bricks used. This would then create knock-on issues concerning what to do with the waste streams instead but that is not a problem for the cement sector. These are worries for another day, as we first need to see how thermal batteries work at scale at a cement plant.

A recent feature in the Economist considered whether the mass adoption of electrical power from renewable sources might be an increasingly viable path to decarbonising industry. Geopolitics, faster-than-expected growth in renewables and new technology are all doing their bit to make this possible. As with so much of the carbon agenda it may alter the very concept of the traditional cement production line or at least the speed of change. Just imagine how a future cement plant might look, decked out with a electrical micro-grid, a heat battery, an oxy-fuel kiln, a carbon capture unit and either a chemical plant or gas pipeline junction. Will it happen? Who knows… but it is an exciting time for the cement sector.

A few news stories from Chile give us the opportunity to take at look at the local cement market this week. Firstly, Freehill Mining was keen to promote a new order it has obtained from Cementos Melón. The Australia-based company operates magnetite mineral concessions at Yerbas Buenas, about 500km north of Santiago. The US$180,000 deal starts in March 2024 but the raw material supplier says it is currently negotiating a longer-term supply contract with Melón for larger volumes in the future.

A large order for raw materials is not unusual, although the public nature of the Freehill Mining one suggests that the mining company is promoting itself. The story also highlights the importance of the mining sector in Chile. However, a wider view of the Chilean cement sector could be glimpsed recently from the latest cement despatch data from La Cámara Chilena de la Construcción (CCHC). Despatches fell by 11% year-on-year to 5.2Mt in 2023 from 5.9Mt in 2022. As can be seen in Graph 1, despatches recovered in 2021 following the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic but they have declined since then.

Graph 1: Cement despatches in Chile, 2018 – 2023. Source: La Cámara Chilena de la Construcción.

Two of the three larger cement producers have reacted to these market conditions in the last couple of years by cutting costs. Cementos Melón started a restructuring process in late 2022 whereupon it closed down a concrete plant at Penalolen near Santiago and embarked on a spending review. Its income fell by 4% year-on-year to US$182m in the first nine months of 2023, from US$189m in the same period in 2022. Cemento Polpaico followed suit in November 2023 by closing two concrete plants in the Santiago Metropolitan Region and temporarily suspending operations at its Quilicura cement grinding plant with work shifted to the integrated Cerro Blanco plant instead. In June 2023 it reported that its income had risen slightly year-on-year for the first half of 2023, but it noted a loss compared to a profit previously. Cbb (formerly Cementos Bío Bío) managed to avoid the fate of its peers mainly through the performance of its lime division. Its cement and concrete shipments fell by 9% and 15% year-on-year to 775,000t and 750,000m3 respectively in the first nine months of 2023. It blamed the falling sales volumes on a decline in economic activity that dragged upon investment in infrastructure and housing. However, lime shipments grew by 2% following tough trading conditions in 2022 due to high fuel costs, amongst other reasons. Altogether this meant that the company’s earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) rose by 54% to US$44.3m from US$28.8m.

Finally, a third news story this week illustrated one reaction to the poor construction market in Chile, when Unacem Chile announced that it was buying two concrete plants, at San Antonio and Talca. Once the US$1m deal completes, the subsidiary of Peru-based Unión Andina de Cementos (UNACEM) will hold 12 concrete plants in the country. This follows its entry into the market in 2018 when it acquired Hormigones Independencia from Cementos Polpaico. In December 2023 Grupo Gloria subsidiary Cal y Cementos Sur (Calcesur) said that it was preparing to strengthen its presence supplying lime to the mining sector both at home in Peru and in neighbouring countries including Chile. While this isn’t a cement story, Grupo Gloria does operate the integrated Yura plant near Arequipa in southern Peru and this resonates with both the mining and lime sectors.

Chile’s cement market is suffering as the general construction market contracts. Yet as the stories from Freehill Mining and Calcesur show, the mining sector remains a key part of the national economy and this links to the cement industry. Another related story, for example, is a US$39m deal that Denmark-based FLSmidth signed in mid-2023 to supply equipment for a copper mine. Chile’s northern neighbour Peru has a cement sector that is nearly twice as large based on production capacity and some of its producers look internationally for expansion opportunities, as in the example of Unacem Chile. The CHHC didn’t hold back in mid-January 2024 when it said that it forecast that 2024 would be the worst year for investment and construction spending since the late 2010s. Yet it also expects the decline in the construction sector to slow as gains from government infrastructure spending continue to almost counteract falls in the private sector. Until the situation improves, it continues to lobby for economic reforms.

For more information on cement markets in South America read the feature in the February 2024 issue of Global Cement Magazine

We return this week to look at Holcim’s decision to separate and list its business in North America. This is big news because the region delivered nearly a third of the group's earnings in 2022 and a quarter of its net sales. The building materials market in North America has shown considerable potential for Holcim and other companies in recent years. The question then is why would Holcim want to divest this wealth generating potential from the rest of the business? The answer lies in how much Holcim US could be worth in the future.

The group announced at the end of January 2024 that it is working towards a full capital market separation and US listing of its North American business. The transaction will be run as a spin-off with the intention of benefiting all of the company’s present shareholders. The intention is to create the “leading pure-play North American building solutions company,” with the US listing expected to complete in the first half of 2025. The new company will be run separately and independently to the rump of ‘non-US Holcim’ with its own management structure and directors. Crucially, non-US Holcim itself does not intend to have any cross-shareholding in the new company. Holcim’s current chief executive officer Jan Jenisch will focus on his role as chair from May 2024 with the appointment of Miljan Gutovic. Jenisch will then lead the work on spinning-off the US business before later, possibly, taking a senior position at one of the resulting companies, according to his comments at an investors and analysts’ conference.

Holcim says it is doing this to maximise the return to its shareholders. This dodges the question, given that public companies partly exist to do this anyway, so the decision may be more about generating value for shareholders in the short term rather than, say, increasing value for both shareholders and stakeholders by building a bigger business empire. Jenisch explained the decision as a natural evolution of the company’s strategy and he repeatedly described himself as “the first servant of the shareholders.” The divestment should make both companies more valuable through corporate reorganisation rather than buying new companies or making new products. The other thing to consider is that Holcim's shareholders have not been shy in making their requirements known going back to the arguments over the share split when Lafarge and Holcim merged in 2015 and the subsequent battle for the direction of the group.

A spin-off is a form of corporate divestment where a parent company creates a subsidiary as a separate entity with its own management structure and it distributes the shares in the new company between its existing shareholders. Typically it is seen as a good option for the shareholders of the original company compared to other types of divestment such as a split-off, an equity carve out or a straight sale. The benefits include generating proceeds from the divestment, simplifying the corporate structure, increasing the value of both companies and there are tax advantages too. The risk of going for a spin-off though is that the new company may start with operational or financial issues as it starts going solo. It may also have difficulty dealing with market preconceptions about what the new organisation is like based on the parent.

Jenisch said that the group had considered going for an initial public offering for the North American business but had decided that this was riskier. Holcim expects and hopes that the value of the two companies will be higher separately than as they are at present as part of one company. Hence, its investor presentation describing the spin-off was full of plenty of arguments positioning how strong the US business is and could be. Chief financial officer Steffen Kindler also pointed out during the investor conference that one of the reasons the company opted for a full separation was to better secure Standard and Poor's (S&P) listing criteria, another sign that the plan is targeted towards securing as much value as possible. The company is targeting net sales of over US$20bn/yr by 2030 for its North American business.

The strength of the US market in recent years has been evident from the actions of other companies in the building materials sector. Ireland-based CRH moved its primary listing to the US in 2023 due to its high proportion of earnings from the country and the potential in the future from “continued economic expansion, a growing population and significant construction needs.” Another big recent transaction in the sector was the merger of the US operations of Summit Materials and Cementos Argos that completed in early 2024. The diverging prospects of the US economy versus Europe have been driving this trend. Listing on a US exchange can also give companies potentially higher valuations along with access to a larger market and easier connections to private equity to help fund expansion.

With this in mind Holcim’s decision to do something with its North America operations makes sense as it helps the company to increase the return to its shareholders, grow the business and remain competitive. The dominance of the US market on Holcim’s balance sheet is increasingly making the company a US one but without the advantages of being locally based. A spin-off suits the Milton Freedman dictum that companies only exist to maximise shareholder return but there is always a debate to be had about how to actually do this. Splitting Holcim’s growth-based US business from the more sustainability-minded European one ties into this for example, as differences in corporate social responsibilities grow between the regions.

Finally, on an emotional level giving up a key business area feels like a wrench to the status quo. Holcim will no longer be the largest cement producer outside of China once the separation completes. We await further details on how the two companies will be connected following the split… but change is coming.