Analysis

Cemex's decision to head deeper into eastern Europe as part of the Cemex-Holcim asset swap announced this week suggests some nerve. Cement production levels started to fall in the region from 2012, according to Cembureau figures, with continued problems reported so far by the multinational cement producers in 2013. Cemex seems likely to lose money from the start with its new assets in the Czech Republic.

In more detail, Cemex will acquire all of Holcim's assets in the Czech Republic, which include a 1.1Mt/yr cement plant, four aggregates quarries and 17 ready-mix plants. In return Holcim will give Cemex Euro70m and Cemex will give Holcim its assets in western Germany including one cement plant and two grinding mills that encompass a total capacity of 2.5Mt/yr, one slag granulator, 22 aggregates quarries and 79 ready-mix plants.

Cemex must believe that it can wait out the recovery of the construction sector in eastern Europe or make savings from having a more easterly spread of assets. Certainly Cemex said in its press release on the asset swap that its earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) would start to rise from US$20m to US$30m from 2014.

The question for the buyers at Cemex who considered this deal is whether the construction market has bottomed out in the Czech Republic yet. According to World Bank figures, following the 2008 financial crisis Czech Gross Domestic Product (GDP) fell to a low of US$197bn in 2009, rose again until 2011 but then fell to US$196bn in 2012. Currently the Czech National Bank is anticipating a further fall in growth in 2013. Meanwhile, data from a third quarter 2013 Czech construction sector analysis by CEEC Research reported that a drop of at least 4.7% was expected in 2013 with a follow-on decline of 2.7% in 2014.

Possibly one deal-maker for Cemex was the prospect of combined operations with Holcim in Spain across cement, aggregates and ready-mix. Similar to the Lafarge-Tarmac joint-venture in the UK, the move offers reduced risk in a declining western European market. How the Spanish competition authorities will respond remains to be seen. Elsewhere on the continent this week the decision by the Belgian Competition Council to fine the Belgian cement sector shows an example of behaviour the Spanish authorities will want to avoid.

This week's news that Boral's operations have been disrupted by the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) in the Australian state of Victoria highlights an increasingly difficult situation for the company and the Australian cement industry in general.

Boral's worksite at Footscray, near Melbourne, was allegedly blockaded by the CFMEU last week over the union's separate and long-running dispute with site contractor Grocon. The CFMEU wants Boral to stop supplying Grocon sites. Boral says that it has been forced to address the issue at Footscray and two other sites by issuing injunctions against the union. After its first half results announcement last week, which showed a loss of US$192m for the year ending 30 June 2013, this is clearly the last thing that Boral needs to be dealing with.

So far, 2013 has seen mainly trouble for Boral. In January it announced that it would shed 1000 jobs across its global operations, including 885 in its native Australia. In February it announced that the company made a US$25m loss in the half year to 31 December 2012. In March, it restructured by merging production divisions to save additional cash. It also had to suspend production at its Waurn Ponds plant. However, revenues have been rising. Boral is not Titan.

Elsewhere in Australia, Adelaide Brighton announced that its first half 2013 profit fell by 9% year-on-year. It expects no improvement over 2012 in the rest of the year.

With the onset of the carbon tax, cement manufacturing is increasingly expensive in Australia, a fact that is especially difficult when combined with lower demand. China, Indonesia and Vietnam all produce similar quality cement 'nearby' at considerably lower cost, making the long-term future of cement manufacturing in Australia look fragile. Indeed, this is a trend that Australia shares with its antipodean neighbour. In New Zealand, after years of indecision, Holcim recently decided to not build a new cement plant at Weston. A new import terminal is its new preferred strategy. Could Australia, a country with such vast reserves of fuels and minerals, also be gradually heading towards cement import dependency?

'Below expectations' was the headline message from Holcim's half-year results this week. Canada, Mexico and Morocco were all singled out as problem areas for Holcim but surely India represents the biggest headache for the debt-reducing multinational.

How badly its bottom line was hit by India in particular, Holcim declined to say. Overall its entire Asia Pacific region saw sales volumes of cement fall by 3.7% to 37.8Mt to 36.4Mt for the first six months of 2013. In 2012, India represented over half of the group's Asia Pacific installed cement production capacity. This suggests that the actual drop in sales in India was probably at least 6%, more if the other countries in the territory did better than in 2012. Overall profits for the Asia Pacific region fell by 14% to US$650m. What we do know is that Holcim announced major restructuring to its businesses in India in late July 2013 to cut costs.

The other major cement producers in India have fared similarly badly. UltraTech's first quarter profit, for the period ending on 30 June 2013, fell by 13.5% to US$111m. Its revenue fell by 2% to US$820m. Jaiprakash Associates also reported a 2% dip in its cement sector revenue to US$247m in the quarter ending on 30 June 2013. Profits fell by 24% to US$27m. India Cements' sales revenue rose by 3% to US$196m. Yet its operating profit fell too, by 41% to US$19.8m.

Both Holcim and India Cements blamed falling cement prices in the south of India. India Cements directly mentioned overcapacity. The only explanation UltraTech offered for its poor performance was rising input and logistics costs.

Problems in India are not unexpected. Overcapacity has loomed over the Indian cement industry for some time as the race for growth far overtook the increase in demand. In the wider economy, India hit its lowest gross domestic product increase in a decade, 'just 5%', for the financial year ending on 31 March 2013. Meanwhile the Indian Rupee fell to a record low of 61 against the US Dollar in late June 2013. Not good news at all for any cement producers looking to offset energy or raw materials costs from abroad.

As predicted in our overview of the Indian cement industry back in February 2013, the smaller cement producers are now likely to get picked off by the larger firms as capacity utilisation falls and fuel costs rise. It is interesting to compare this free-market led cement industry consolidation to the state-directed one happening in China.

The Indian media are certainly wise to this with reports and speculation on endless takeover rumours. One example of this is the Irish building materials conglomerate Cement Roadstone Holdings's (CRH) decision to purchase Sree Jayajothi Cements that was announced in early August 2013. However with CRH itself having just reported that it made a loss in the first half of 2013 it may be regretting that it finally has a presence in the south of India.

In the January 2013 issue of Global Cement Magazine, we featured a review of the Ethiopian cement industry. At the time we were hopeful with respect to the country's future cement demand, buoyed along by Ethiopia's own bold targets for development of the sector. It seemed only a matter of time before international and regional producers went to Ethiopia and cashed in on a cement plant-building bonanza.

Ethiopia's government is keen to further develop Ethiopia's cities and infrastructure and wants to increase its per-capita cement consumption from 35kg/yr at present to ~300kg/yr in the period to 2017. To do this, it is encouraging the cement sector to swell from its current capacity (7.4Mt/yr integrated capacity with additional grinding capability) to over 27Mt/yr by the same year. At the same time, the country has banned cement imports, a bold statement of intent designed to protect its own growing industry.

This week, we have learned that the country is hitting its bold production targets, largely without assistance from outside players. However, it seems that Ethiopia is incapable of consuming the volumes of cement that have been produced. As of 12 August 2013, the Ministry of Industry announced that Ethiopia made 12Mt of cement in the year to 7 July 2013, more than double the 5.4Mt/yr that it demanded over the same period. This revelation casts the government's future predictions for rapid cement demand growth in serious doubt.

While it takes effort to picture Ethiopia producing 27Mt/yr of cement by 2017, such rapid development is happening in west Africa, where Nigeria's Dangote Cement is achieving 'regional-giant' status.

However, it would take a very great leap of imagination to believe that Ethiopia could consume 27Mt/yr in 2017, five times what it does today, even with the development of major projects like the Millennium Renaissance Dam (a US$4.2bn hydroelectric project), major city and road-building projects and a rapidly growing population. Its cement capacity would have to grow by 4.9Mt/yr, representing average year-on-year cement demand growth of 52.5%/yr. Even with a cement industry the size of Ethiopia's, this represents almost impossible growth. To support this increase in demand, GDP/capita, which is often closely correlated to cement demand, would probably also have to raise fivefold, from US$374 to US$1870. This difference would take it from the bottom 20% of African nations well into the top third by this measure.

If this over-production trend continues, it does not bode well for Ethiopia's domestic cement industry. While exports may appear attractive, options are limited. Kenya to the south has a larger and more well-established cement industry, Somalia has major economic and security drawbacks and Ethiopia's relationships with Eritrea and Djibouti, both of which declared independence from Ethiopia, are tense. With no coast of its own, maritime exports will be difficult, especially with low-cost cement flowing from India, Pakistan and Iran. South Sudan, with its lack of cement production facilities, plentiful oil and major trade/border dispute with Sudan, could offer a small market for Ethiopian exports, but not enough to satisfy a ~20Mt/yr overcapacity.

Read Global Cement's January 2013 review of the Ethiopian cement industry here.

Weston is off. The 'will-they, won't they' of the New Zealand cement industry took a more decisive turn this week with the announcement that Holcim New Zealand intends to import cement instead.

Once Holcim's existing cement plant at Westport winds down there will be no more indigenous cement production on New Zealand's South Island. Golden Bay Cement on North Island will be left as the nation's sole cement producer. Instead Holcim now plans to build US$80m on an import terminal and related infrastructure.

Given a previous price tag of US$400m for the Weston project, switching to an import strategy makes sense for Holcim which has had a hard time of late with a poor first quarter following a tough year in 2012. Despite the benefits that the construction sector in New Zealand has seen with the rebuilding following the 2011 Christchurch earthquake, Holcim is thinking of its wider strategy. Although, as one of the largest multinational cement producers, Holcim has a wide supply chain for clinker, Australia reported poor sales in 2012 and it would be an obvious hub to keep New Zealand topped up with sufficient product.

Last week's doubts about the Indian cement market – when Holcim announced major business restructuring in India – may also have an effect as Vicat too has reported problems in the country this week. The question to ask when Holcim releases its half-year results in mid-August 2013 is how much excess capacity does the company have?

Coincidentally, importing cement is one issue that has come up in the UK Competition Commission's on-going investigation into the UK cement industry. An Irish cement importer has alleged that unnamed European cement producers have blocked his attempts to import cement to Ireland. The UK Competition Commission will continue its investigation until late 2013. Whilst we are not suggesting that the New Zealand cement industry has any problems of this kind, as the market adjusts to a higher level of imports it will encounter new challenges.