Displaying items by tag: AfriSam

Interesting move from HeidelbergCement this week with the news that it has agreed to buy a cement plant in Tanzania. The Germany-based multinational producer has signed a deal to buy a 68% stake in Tanga Cement from South Africa-based AfriSam. There has been no indication of the price but the arrangement will give HeidelbergCement a 1.3Mt/yr integrated plant in the north of the country along with a limestone quarry with reserves to last 30 years. The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2022. HeidelbergCement says it then hopes to buy the remaining shares in the company.

HeidelbergCement already operates one integrated plant in Tanzania, Tanzania Portland Cement’s (TPC) Wazo Hill Plant in the capital Dar es Salaam. It took control of the plant in the early 2000s when its subsidiary Scancem International purchased over half of the company’s shares. The plant commissioned a new cement mill in 2014 to increase its production capacity to 2Mt/yr. Local press reported in April 2021 that the subsidiary planned to invest US$15m towards modernising the unit in 2021. It sells cement under the Twiga brand.

Tanga Cement runs a plant near Tanga that was originally commissioned in 1980. Holcim took it over in the mid-1990s before South-Africa based AfriSam assumed control in the early 2010s. The plant commissioned a second production line in 2016 and it has a production capacity of 1.3Mt/yr. It sells cement under the Simba brand.

HeidelbergCement’s decision to buy a plant in Tanzania is noteworthy because it goes against the general trend in acquisitions by western-based multinational cement companies in recent years. Instead of shrinking away from markets in developing economies and doubling-down on ‘safe havens’ in mature markets it has bought a plant in a developing country. Although one might argue that it does fit the definition of a well-chosen bolt-on acquisition.

Graph 1: Cement production in Tanzania, 2011 – 2020. Source: Tanzania National Bureau of Statistics.

As Graph 1 above shows, cement production in Tanzania has more than doubled over the last decade, from 2.4Mt in 2011 to 6.5Mt in 2020. Tanzania Portland Cement estimated local demand at 5.9Mt, including exports, in 2020. This was against a total cement production capacity, from both integrated and grinding plants, of 11Mt/yr. As well as the TPC and Tanga Cement plants mentioned above, Holcim runs an integrated plant in Mbeya and Huaxin Cement operates one near Tanga. Alongside this, new integrated plants have opened including Lake Cement’s 0.5Mt/yr Kimbiji plant in 2014 and Dangote Cement’s 3Mt/yr Mtwara plant in 2015. The big project on the horizon is a proposed 7Mt/yr integrated plant from China-based CNBM/Sinoma, although not much has been heard publicly about it since mid-2020. At that time local press was reporting that compensation was being finalised for residents of the proposed site near Tanga. Needless to say, given the size of the plant compared to the Tanzanian cement market, much of the plant’s output is intended for export.

With the CNBM plant in mind, it is noteworthy that HeidelbergCement committed to buying an extra plant in the country. Production has been going up over the last decade to presumably meet demand but the new Chinese project could potentially blot out the entire existing production. Tanzania faced a cement shortage at the end of 2020 despite coronavirus. TPC has repeatedly warned of production overcapacity in Tanzania and the challenges of competition. Yet it reported a new sales record in 2020 and growth of 7% in the national cement market. Despite a 5Mt overcapacity, TPC says it managed to adapt to the new market conditions. It also managed to grow its operating profit by 20% year-on-year to around US$46m in 2020 compared to HeidelbergCement Group’s 8% rise in results from current operations in 2020. This kind of return no doubt helped HeidelbergCement to make up its mind.

South Africa: The Competition Tribunal has confirmed an agreement between PPC and the South African Competition Commission granting the company immunity from prosecution in an investigation allegedly involving price fixing and market sharing between local cement producers from 1995 to 2009. The Cape Times newspaper has reported that the ruling additionally granted the company immunity from related fines. PPC has reportedly agreed not to engage in price fixing or prohibited conduct in the future. The Commission said, "In addition, it will have to develop a competition law compliance programme."

AfriSam and Lafarge Industries South Africa paid fines related to the case. However, a case against Natal Portland Cement (NPC) was dismissed.

There have been rumours in the press this week that LafargeHolcim is weighing up its options in South Africa. Reports in the local press allege that the building materials company has tasked Credit Suisse Group with finding a buyer for its business. This may or may not be true, only time will tell, but South Africa certainly feels like a market where LafargeHolcim should be considering its future.

As a prominent but smaller producer in the country, Lafarge South Africa is behind PPC and AfriSam in terms of clinker production capacity. InterCement’s subsidiary Natal Portland Cement and Dangote’s subsidiary Sephaku Cement have a similar production base with an integrated plant each and one or two grinding plants. Halfway through 2019 LafargeHolcim was describing market conditions as ‘difficult’ in the country with it being the sole Sub-Saharan market holding back regional growth for the group. By the third quarter the situation had reportedly improved but net sales and cement sales volumes were flat for the year to date. A clearer picture should emerge when LafargeHolcim publishes its fourth quarter results at the end of February 2020.

PPC provided its view of the market in its half-year results to 30 September 2019. Its estimate was that the South African cement industry declined by 10 - 15% for the period, creating a competitive environment. It added that the situation had been, ‘exacerbated by imports and blender activity.’ Both its revenue and earnings fell year-on-year, although a 30% rise in fuel costs didn’t help either. Sephaku Cement suffered a similar time of it, with a 19% fall in cement sales volumes during the first half, although it reported improvement in the subsequent quarter. Overall, it blamed falling infrastructure investment for pressurising the market and allowing blending activity to mount. Sephaku Cement was also wary of the local carbon tax that started in June 2019 warning of a potential US$2.8m/yr bill.

PPC noted that cement imports had risen by 5% to 0.85Mt in the year to August 2019. This followed a lobbying effort by The Concrete Institute (TCI) in mid-2019 to implore the International Trade Administration Commission (ITAC) to look into rising imports levels. At the time the TCI’s managing director Brian Perrie expressed incomprehension that a country with six different cement production companies with an over-capacity rate of 30% could be facing this problem. This latest broadside tails South Africa’s previous attempt to fend off imports when it instituted anti-dumping duties of 17 – 70% against importers from Pakistan in 2015. Imports duly fell in 2016 but rose again in 2017 and 2018, mainly from Vietnam and China.

All of this sounds familiar following LafargeHolcim’s departure from the ‘hyper-competitive’ South-East Asian countries in 2019. Those countries also suffered from competition and raging imports. Bloomberg pointed out in a report on the local industry in 2016 that PPC’s, AfriSam’s and LafargeHolcim’s kilns had an average age of 32 years, suggesting that efficiency and maintenance were going to be concerns in the future. Also of note is LargeHolcim’s decision to move its South African operations from one subsidiary, Lafarge Africa, to another, Caricement, in mid-2019.

Some level of market consolidation would certainly help local overcapacity. Plus, surely, LafargeHolcim’s mix of inland integrated capacity and a grinding plant near the coast could prove enticing to some of the Asian companies pumping out all of those imports. The thought on the minds of potential buyers everywhere must be, if LafargeHolcim chief Jan Jenisch was bold enough to sell up in South-East Asia, how can he not in South Africa?!”

South Africa: The South African cement industry is calling on the International Trade Administration Commission (ITAC) to probe a flood of imports into the country. South Africa, which has six cement producers and more than 30% over-capacity, has become a net importer of cement. Imports have increased by 139% since 2016, according to The Concrete Institute’s (ITC) managing director Brian Perrie.

Perrie said in an interview that TCI, representing AfriSam, Dangote Cement South Africa, Lafarge Industries South Africa, Natal Portland Cement and PPC were approaching ITAC to investigate whether the industry required protection from an 18-month surge in imports.

He said that imported cement was undercutting South African prices by as much as 45%, while local producers also had to meet the requirements of the Southern African Customs Union (SACU), meet black empowerment and other social requirements and, at the same time, protect thousands of jobs in the domestic industry. Also, the recent carbon tax translated into a 2% increase in selling prices, putting the local industry at a further price disadvantage. “Trade remedy protection is required," said Perrie, pointing out that producers did not want a ‘ban’ on imports, rather some form of protection to ‘level the playing field.’

South Africa instituted anti-dumping duties of 17 – 70% against importers from Pakistan in 2015. Imports duly fell in 2016 but rose again in 2017 and 2018, mainly from Vietnam and China. Perrie said that 350,441t of cement arrived in the second quarter of 2019 alone, the most since the third quarter of 2015. Most came in through Durban (260,909t), an 85% increase on the first quarter.

South Africa: The Competition Tribunal has resumed hearings into allegations of cartel-like behaviour by Natal Portland Cement (NPC), Pretoria Portland Cement Company (PPC), Lafarge Industries South Africa (Lafarge) and AfriSam Consortium (AfriSam). It follows a referral by the Competition Commission following an investigation in 2015 that examined collusive conduct between the cement companies between 2008 and 2012. At the time PPC was granted conditional leniency and AfriSam and Lafarge settled with the Commission.

There are two significant cement producers around the world up for sale at the moment. Last week we dealt with India’s Binani Cement, which has so far attracted 15 separate bids from a number of international and domestic players. Now, we turn our attention to South Africa, where PPC remains the target of approaches by LafargeHolcim and CRH.

This week PPC rejected a partial offer from Canada’s Fairfax Holdings, which it considered neither fair nor reasonable. Like a mutual friend at a party that insists two people ‘really are perfect for each other,’ Fairfax had stipulated in its terms that PPC should merge with AfriSam to create a South African super-producer. It does not appear that this idea went down well and that particular combination now seems further away than ever.

When the news broke that it had rejected Fairfax, we thought that PPC’s stance seemed a little ‘too cool.’ However, looking just at the oversized and import-addled South African market does not give the full picture of what’s happening for PPC at the moment. It has significant and growing activities in the rest of Africa too.

Later this week PPC released its results for the first half of its 2018 fiscal year. Suddenly, its handling of the Fairfax offer made more sense. Over the six months to 30 September 2017, PPC nearly tripled its profit to US$21.1m. Crucially, sales from outside South Africa grew far more rapidly than those at home. While domestic earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) rose by 4%, EBITDA from elsewhere increased by 25%. These results bode well for a potential bidding war that now favours PPC.

Even from this greatly enhanced position, PPC was not finished with its announcements for the week. Today it revealed that it plans to build a new ‘mega-factory’ in the Western Cape. Johan Claassen, the interim chief executive of PPC, said there would probably be a formal announcement about new capacity in the Western Cape in 2018. He said that PPC had decided to conduct a feasibility study into a possible replacement for its Riebeeck plant. An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is in progress and the plant is reported to be ‘semi-brownfield.’ Claassen said that the new facility would use around 25% of the current Riebeeck equipment and cost US$200/t of installed capacity.

The news of its results and announcement of the new plant represent a good PR move by PPC given the difficulties faced by the wider South African market. The new information will certainly give cause for CRH and LafargeHolcim to think again about the values of their offers, should PPC also be of the view that these also undervalue the company.

South Africa: PPC has seen its net profit rise significantly in the six months to September 2017. It nearly tripled its profit year-on-year to US$21.1m from US$7.3m.

The company benefited particularly from a strong performance from its assets outside of South Africa. Its earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) from its non-domestic assets rose by 25%, while group EBITDA grew by 4% to US$86m. The results bode well for a potential bidding war that now favours PPC shareholders.

Earlier in the week, PPC effectively rejected a conditional partial offer from AfriSam and Canada’s Fairfax Group for the company, stating that it undervalued the company. This latest set of results brings this assessment into sharper focus and may give cause for CRH and LafargeHolcim to think again about the values of their own non-binding offers, should PPC also be of the view that these also undervalue the company.

South Africa: PPC has said that its independent board would not recommend Canadian firm Fairfax Africa Investments' partial offer to shareholders, considering it neither fair nor reasonable. In September 2017 Fairfax offered to buy 22% of PPC for US$144m on the condition that PPC accepted a merger proposal with rival AfriSam.

"The Independent Expert, having considered two possible outcomes of the proposed merger, is of the opinion that the partial offer, both in the context of the proposed merger as well as on a stand-alone basis, is not fair and reasonable," said PPC in a statement.

South Africa: Prudential Investment Managers, one of the main shareholders of PPC, says it opposes a proposed merger between the cement producer and AfriSam. It said that the deal undervalues the group, according to the Business Daily newspaper. It added that it expects PPC’s share price to double in the next three to four years as production capacity in sub-Saharan African comes on line. Prudential owns a 14% share in PPC. Canada’s Fairfax Financial Holdings has made an offer of US$154m to buy a stake in PPC on condition that the cement producer agrees to a merger with AfriSam.

South Africa: AfriSam has described its offer with Fairfax Financial Holdings to buy a stake in PPC for US$154m as ‘fair.’ In a questions and answer statement on its website it commented that the “…Partial Offer and Merger reflect the fair and relative value of PPC and AfriSam based on the unaffected market price for PPC shares and other valuation benchmarks.” PPC described the offer to its shareholders as low and has confirmed that it has been in communication with other potential bidders, including Nigeria’s Dangote Cement.