Analysis

India: The announcement last week that 11 Indian cement producers face a combined US$1.1bn penalty for a price-fixing cartel will cast a long shadow over the country's increasingly vulnerable-looking cement industry.

For years the Indian cement industry has been beset by suspicions of over-capacity despite a constant stream of new capacity. Now the Competition Commission of India (CCI) thinks that it has got to the heart of the paradox by accusing manufacturers of limiting production amid high demand and colluding to artificially raise prices.

The amount that the CCI has fined the companies, 50% of their net profits for the two fiscal years to 31 March 2011, is quite astonishing. If enforced in its entirety the fine effectively negates a large portion of the sector's profits for an entire fiscal year. This is clearly not a slap-on-the-wrist from the CCI.

In the 1990s and early 2000s a similar cartel case involving European (and specifically German) cement producers led to fines in the order of hundreds of thousands of US Dollars. The industry has since cleaned up its act considerably as a result. Indian producers would be foolish not to follow suit. What are the likely effects in the Indian case?

Removing the cartel that the CCI purports to have found would reduce prices, which are inflated by an oft-quoted 25% median in a cartel. This is clearly good news for consumers and potentially the development of the Indian economy in general. The obvious losers in this situation would be the producers, which would see a reduction in profitability. Some of the smaller producers would find such a situation very challenging, with the risk of going bust or being absorbed into larger companies.

Another possibility is that the accusations will spread along the value chain. Shortly after the announcement of the fine, the Builders' Association of India (BAI), announced that it wants the fine increased to accommodate compensation claims from contractors and consumers that it feels are out-of-pocket as a result of the cartel. Many will feel aggrieved now that they 'know' the cement companies were profiteering - sorting out claims from affected parties could be a long and costly exercise.

The effects of the fine could also extend to outside of India. Indian cement producers, very good customers of the Chinese and European cement plant manufacturers in recent years, will have to deal with lower revenues. This will clearly dampen their enthusiasm to contract further capacity and may cause knock-on-effects for Sinoma, KHD, Polysuis and other major suppliers. The cement industries of neighbouring countries, like Pakistan, may also be affected.

Whatever happens in the Indian cement industry as a result of the CCI's fine, the authority, only formed in 2009, has shown that it is serious about taking on corruption in India. In the long run that can only help develop the potential of the country.

"The first thing for any new competition regulator is to go out and find the cement cartel. My experience of this subject is, it is always there, somewhere," wrote Richard Whish, a Professor of Law at King's College London in 2001. "The only countries in which I had been unable to find the cement cartel is where there is a national state-owned monopoly for cement."

The Global CemPower conference took place last week in London, attracting 103 delegates from 25 countries. The conference looked at waste heat recovery options in the global cement industry. 'Back-of-the-envelope' calculations suggest that the value of the waste heat recovery units that could be installed in the global cement industry in the next ten years might total US$50bn - well worth thinking about.

Robert McCaffrey, the conference convenor, gave a listing at the event of the seven megatrends that will shape the future of the global cement industry, including demographic trends (aging of both developing and developed nations), urbanisation (with 70-75% of humanity due to live in cities by 2050), the growth of new country superpowers, the possibility of further climate change, paradigm shifts in the cement industry business model, ever-increasing energy costs and the influence of Rumsfeldian known-unknowns and unknown-unknowns.

Whatever else happens in the next 50 years, increased energy costs and energy efficiency will be the order of the day. In the global cement industry, waste heat recovery is here to stay.

Presentations, videos and a full review of the Global CemPower conference are available here, www.globalcement.com/conferences/global-cempower/introduction.

Lafarge announced swingeing cuts this week in a new bid to squash its debt. The headline figures were that it intends to generate at least Euro1.75bn earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) in the four years from 2012 to the end of 2015 and that it aims to reduce net debt below Euro10bn in 2013.

Given that Lafarge's EBITDA has dropped from Euro4.62bn in 2008 to Euro Euro3.22bn in 2011 this seems like a tough job. In addition to finding the savings, Lafarge may also have to battle the decline of the Euro a clear and present danger for a multinational with deep Eurozone foundations. The group has detailed planned cost savings of at least Euro400m in 2012 and of at least Euro300m in 2013. Both of these figures are below the yearly average of Euro435m required to meet the EBITDA target of Euro1750m by 2015.

First came the regional restructuring from January 2012 with the job losses but how Lafarge will really save cash still remains unclear. Higher energy savings through alternative fuels, increased savings from new programmes to manage electricity and productivity improvements were all mentioned in the press release. No specific information was provided for how these changes will affect the bottom line. Practically, analysts expect that Lafarge will raise its cement prices in response to rising energy input costs, making profits along the way with raised margins.

Lafarge chief executive Bruno Lafont stated that the group will raise Euro1bn in asset sales in 2012. On the cement side, progress on the Lafarge-Tarmac UK joint venture will start by the end of June 2012. The combined assets are valued at around Euro500m. News on an Indian acquisition in Lafarge South Africa has gone quiet since Aditya Birla Group and Shree Cement were reported as showing interest in January 2012. The holding was valued at around Euro650m.

Crudely assuming that half of the proceeds of the sale of the Lafarge-Tarmac assets will go to Lafarge, selling Lafarge South Africa would probably allow Lafarge to hit Lafont's target for 2012. That just leaves similar savings for 2013, 2014 and 2015 to be found! What does Lafarge intend sell next?

Spend, spend, spend has been the advice for CRH this week. The suggestion by an industry analyst this week that Irish building material conglomerate CRH should go on a shopping spree seems almost perverse! Or at least like stockbrokers trying to drum up excitement.

Just as all of the big multinational cement producers are selling assets and tightening management structures to cope with the ongoing financial turmoil, CRH is the only player that hasn't ruled out acquisitions in 2012. The analyst from Dublin stockbroking firm Davy predicted that CRH could spend up to Euro3.5bn on acquisitions while remaining within its banking agreements; a more level-headed figure was given as Euro1.5bn.

CRH broke down its revenue in 2011 to 55% to the European divisions and 45% to the American ones, with European Distribution, Americas Materials and European Materials being its top three sections. European Materials, the worldwide division containing cement assets generated Euro2.99bn, 16.5% of total group revenue.

With 85% of CRH's European Materials division concentrated on Switzerland, Finland, Benelux, Eastern Europe, Turkey and Asia its exposure to the Eurozone economic slowdown has been reduced compared to the competition. Yet what to buy next is fraught with risk. If Greece exits the Euro for example, then there may be some bargains going, but how long it would take these assets to become profitable is a big unknown.

Similarly, the over-indebted Mediterranean countries present opportunities and challenges. CRH's decision to transfer its 49% holding in Portuguese cement joint venture Secil to Semapa in May 2012 may indicate CRH's intention to stay well away from the Eurozone until the dust settles. Given the amount of cash that CRH could potentially throw around however, it seems odd that the company didn't try to disrupt the ongoing Cimpor takeover by two Brazilian firms. If anything happened to the bid by Camargo Corrêa and Votorantim then CRH would be in a prime position to benefit should it wish.

Whatever CRH decides to do with its money, it's a good problem to have! Lafarge, Cemex, HeidelbergCement and Holcim must all wish they had the same dilemma.

Two trends have put the squeeze on the Indian cement industry this week. Firstly it emerged that producers were slashing prices ahead of the coming monsoon season. Then the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) proclaimed that it expected cement prices to rise by 5.9% in the 2013 financial year.

Producers cutting prices in May, before the monsoon, is important because it suggests that overall cement demand is already down. Once the rains come demand will go down even more. A slowdown in construction, particularly in infrastructure projects, a labour shortage and a sand shortage have all been blamed. Looking ahead however, as the CMIE has done, suggests that prices have to go up due to the increase in railway freight charges announced in March 2012 and the excise duty hike announced in the Union Budget 2012-13. All that remains in the middle are the profit margins that the cement industry has become accustomed to.

Back in January 2012 Fitch Ratings predicted a 'negative outlook' for the Indian cement industry in 2012, based on overcapacity and higher interest rates. Now it seems that total capacity utilisation is down in 2012 compared to 2011, from 76.2% to 71.3%. Throw in the railway and duty increases and one might be tempted to feel that Fitch went easy on the subcontinent.

Yet, the cement producers have already found one silver lining in the monsoon season. Industry sources were soon reported as using price increases in the country's south zone and price decreases in the north zone as evidence that cartel-like behaviour couldn't possibly be happening. In a country as large as India perhaps they should have added the words 'nationally coordinated.' Despite the price drops, prices in the cities have been reported at an all-time high due to supply shortages - a situation that may be familiar to some consumers in Saudi Arabia.