Displaying items by tag: UltraTech Cement

India: Both Germany-based HeidelbergCement and Aditya Birla subsidiary UltraTech have responded to the government’s partial lifting of the coronavirus lockdown for rurally-located continuous industries by resuming ‘partial operations in some production facilities.’ Orient Cement subsidiary CK Birla said, “We are in the process of partially resuming our operations at our plants in Karnataka and Maharashtra.” Producers require the permission of the relevant state government to restart plants. In Telangana, where the government has not lifted the lockdown, CK Birla’s facilities remain shut.

The Economic Times newspaper has reported that ‘limited transportation facilities, higher than usual inventory and stricter rules regarding labour safety’ have added a note of caution to resumed operations. Shree Cement managing director Hari Mohan Bangur said, given the continuation of restrictions on construction in cities, “We expect just 10% of normal consumption, with hopes of a gradual increase.”

India: Operations of industrial units in rural areas are clear to resume as of 20 April 2020, subject to local permissions and social distancing rules. Dion News Service has reported that JK Lakshmi Cement has resumed operations at two grinding units in Gujarat, JK Cement has resumed reduced operations at its 3.0Mt/yr integrated Muddapur plant in Karnataka and UltraTech has resumed operations ‘at some of the company’s locations.’ Ambuja Cements, ACC, ICC and India Cements all announced plans to return to full capacity utilisation in phases.

As part of phase two of India’s coronavirus lockdown, public spaces remain closed and public transport is suspended until 3 May 2020.

Yesterday, on 14 April 2020, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) forecast a 3% gross domestic product (GDP) growth contraction in 2020 due to negative economic effects from the coronavirus outbreak and its containment. Most regions around the world may experience negative growth in 2020 with exceptions only in so-called Emerging and Developing Asia and Low-income Developing Countries. This is just one projection among many coming out at the moment but the prognosis is downward. This begs the questions: how will cement companies cope?

Markets for building materials are not going to disappear in these conditions but demand looks likely to be reduced. Added to this, an industry that’s been facing increasing production overcapacity over the years may be challenged by additional competition effects. Here we will look at the debt profile of some of the major multinational cement producers outside of China. Please note that this is a cursory examination of corporate debt that only looks at simple financial indicators. Company financial officers want to present themselves in best possible light and will have alternatives that point to their strengths. For a detailed view we refer readers to the credit rating agencies and the companies’ published financial information directly.

Graph 1: Net debt and EBITDA for selected multinational cement companies in 2019. Source: Company financial reports and investor presentations. Note, Conversion for reporting currencies to US$, HeidelbergCement uses Result from Current Operations Before Depreciation and Amortisation (RCOBD) and UltraTech Cement results from 2018 – 2019 financial year.

Graph 1 presents a comparison between net debt and earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) in real terms. The bigger the gap between debt and earnings then the more one starts to wonder how it can be repaid. One feature to note in this graph is the size of the debt of the three largest producers – LafargeHolcim, HeidelbergCement and Cemex – despite the fact that the companies are of different sizes. Cemex’s high debt to earnings ratio has been much commented on previously following its acquisition of Rinker just before the financial crash in 2007 and 2008. Unfortunately though, despite strenuous mitigation efforts, it remains prominent. Other positions to note are those of Buzzi Unicem and Dangote Cement, which have higher earnings than debts. These are envious positions to be in.

Graph 2: Net debt/EBITDA and EBITDA Margin for selected multinational cement companies in 2019. Source and notes as in Graph 1.

Graph 2 shows the ratio of net debt and EBITDA and the EBITDA Margin, a company’s earnings divided by its revenue. This graph better shows the relationship between debt and earnings. This can be seen well in a comparison between LafargeHolcim and HeidelbergCement. The latter has higher debts with respect to its earnings. Its debt jumped in 2016 following its acquisition of Italcementi. LafargeHolcim’s debts ballooned followed its formation by merger in 2015 but this was in line with the jump in its equity. Where it struggled was with slow earnings in the years afterwards. However, bold divestments in South-East Asia in 2018 and 2019 appear to have fixed this.

Other companies to watch in the higher Net debt/EBITDA category include India’s UltraTech Cement and both of the large Brazilian multinationals, Votorantim and InterCement. In recent years UltraTech Cement has been busy buying up other cement producers in India. The difference between the Brazilian companies may reflect the fallout from their fight to buy Cimpor back in 2012. InterCement and its parent company Camargo Corrêa won the battle to acquire the Portuguese company but Votorantim was given selected international assets outside of Brazil. Unfortunately, the Brazilian market then collapsed and Camargo Corrêa has reportedly been trying to sell some or all of its cement assets ever since.

The other financial indicator in Graph 2 is EBITDA margin or earnings/operating profit as a percentage of revenue. Higher is generally seen as better here in comparison to other companies in the same sector. Note how LafargeHolcim is ahead of HeidelbergCement and Cemex, possibly due to its cost cutting and synergies since the merger. InterCement also has a relatively high EBITDA margin, boosted by a pickup by the Brazilian economy in 2019. Again, Buzzi Unicem and Dangote Cement stand out. Both of these are public companies but are associated with family or individual ownership, although in very different markets. Neither has really indulged in any large-scale acquisitions in recent years. Dangote Cement has been steadily expanding but through building its own plants and distribution networks.

We’ve not mentioned CRH as its figures seem ‘average’ compared to the other cement producers discussed here. Average is of course relative for one of the world’s biggest building materials manufacturers with a net of debt of US$7.4bn in 2019! Yet, despite battles with activist investors over board member pay aside, CRH might be the rare producer that knows when to stop expanding. Notably in 2018 after an expansion phase, including acquisitions of Ash Grove Cement and LafargeHolcim assets previously, it publicly decided in 2018 to take a pause. There may be weaknesses in the company’s balance sheets yet to be revealed but they are not apparent using these metrics.

In summary, we’ve focused on corporate acquisitions here as the main source of debt in cement producers. This is simplistic but timing is everything when taking on a large amount of debt. Cemex is still carrying the scars from buying Rinker over a decade ago and InterCement and HeidelbergCement, to a lesser extent, are ones to watch through the next bad patch. Other things to consider are a general move to a more regional model for these producers away from a global one. UltraTech Cement’s focus on the Indian sub-continent or Dangote Cement’s work in Africa are examples of this. This approach could go wrong if the sole regions they operate in suffer disproportionately from the economic fallout from coronavirus. Or, if any producer, even one with high debts, has the good fortune to be present in a territory that suffers less from the downturn it may benefit. On a final note, it is worth mentioning that government data reports that China’s domestic cement production capacity utilisation in the two-week period ending on 10 April 2020 bounced back to 95% following the relaxation of the lockdown.

Cement producers and suppliers are now reacting to the coronavirus pandemic at scale. The biggest obvious development has been the lockdown in India that began on 24 March 2020. The implications for the cement industry are profound given the country’s population (1.3Bn) and massive cement consumption under normal conditions. It is the country with the world’s second largest cement production capacity.

UltraTech Cement, the biggest producer, said that it was suspending production at ‘various’ locations although it added that the situation was ‘dynamic’ and that it was monitoring it from time to time. Ambuja Cement and JK Lakshmi Cement have done likewise. The latter has suspended cement production at an integrated plant in Rajasthan and three grinding plants in Gujarat. Some Indian states have moved faster than others towards shutting down movement of people so JK Lakshmi’s decision may merely be based on legal necessity. However, a difference may arise in producer strategies between keeping integrated and grinding plants open. Building up inventory is one strategy seen in poor market conditions previously around the world. Alternatively, moving to more of a grinding model might make sense in some territories if, as is happening, countries implement lockdowns at different periods. However, some Indian states have moved faster than others towards shutting down movement of people and JK Lakshmi Cement’s closure pattern may simply reflect this.

At the international scale HeidelbergCement gave an idea to Reuters of the challenge facing the multinationals. Chief executive officer (CEO) Dominik von Achten described the start of 2020 as being strong but that construction projects were being delayed in the US and that activity in France and Spain was starting to weaken. Unsurprisingly, the company has shut down three of its plants in Lombardy at the centre of the Italian epidemic. He added that the group was holding a daily crisis call to assess the effect of the virus upon staff. He also said that the group was stockpiling cement amid the disruption. The clear warning sign was of an existential threat like that faced by the airlines whereby sales could simply stop for a three or four week period… or longer.

On the supplier side, Denmark’s FLSmidth has issued a robust plan on how it is aiming to maintain service and support for its customers. Past all the now-usual stuff such as remote working it included detail on how to support clients on site where absolutely necessary on a case-by-case basis. With regards to its supply chain it pointed out that it was confident, “that any local interruptions to our suppliers can be minimised, even when the agility of some suppliers is put to the test. We have redundancy built into the system.” To this end it emphasised the global nature of its business to ensure that it could deliver parts and equipment to its customers. It claimed that it coped with coronavirus in China due to its ‘very flexible’ supply chain but did admit to some supply chain impacts. Yet it says that production is back to approaching full capacity with workshops in Qingdao and Shanghai above 90% as they work their way through accumulated backlogs. Finally, it is also offering advice on how the company can support its customers on reducing or shutting down operations.

Other supplier comments on the situation have mainly been about protecting staff, working remotely and supporting customers through continued supply of equipment and services. Back in India, Sameer Nagpal, the CEO of refractory manufacturer Dalmia-OCL told Business Standard that the company was coping so far with the crisis with little major impact seen so far. Its raw material supply chain was dependent on China but after some minor disruption it was secure. Most of its customers are domestic, where it hadn’t reported problems so far, although this may change with the Indian lockdown. Exports were a different story as it sends around 10% of its production abroad and it has a plant in Germany. In Europe it was seeing a challenge due to supply chain disruption.

The experiences above are a snapshot of some of what is happening in parts of the industry as coronavirus disruption hits home. China’s restrictions are easing, most of Europe is in lockdown, India has started its quarantine and the US has restricted movement in about a third of its states. The current restrictions in the UK, for example, allow for construction work to continue but local media is debating the associated risks for workers. Other territories have different rules. All of this is affecting demand for cement and concrete. This in turn feeds through to producers and their suppliers. Global Cement continues to monitor the situation and wishes readers a safe passage through the pandemic.

India: Representatives from Aditya Birla subsidiary UltraTech, Ramco Cements, India Cements, JSW Cement and KCP have met with Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Jaganmohan Reddy and other state officials to negotiate the sale of their products to construction companies working on public projects ‘at lower prices.’ The Hindu newspaper has reported that the state forecasts a year-on-year rise in its annual cement consumption of 67%, to 30Mt in 2020 from 18Mt in 2019. India Cements’ vice chair and managing director Narendra Srinavasan said that all planned infrastructure projects ‘ought to be implemented in order to bail out the industry from the turmoil it has been undergoing.’

India: Aditya Birla subsidiary UltraTech has announced plans for a 3.5Mt/yr clinker production capacity expansion to its integrated Andhra Pradesh plant in Bhogasamudram, Anantapur district, to 10Mt/yr from 6.5Mt/yr. The new kiln line will cost US$169m and reach completion in March 2022.

India: Having announced that it will not participate in bidding for Emami Cement, Shree Cement has announced a planned increase to its production capacity of at least 13.1Mt/yr to 55.0Mt/yr or more by 28 February 2023 from 41.9Mt/yr. It would do this through as yet undisclosed upgrades worth a total of US$1.26bn. The Business Standard newspaper has suggested that the measure is aimed at taking on UltraTech, the expected winner in the auction for Emami Cement’s 5.6Mt/yr-capacity installed assets (under expansion to 8.7Mt/yr).

A source of additional capital for Shree Cement’s planned expansion will be a qualified institutional placement (QIP) through which it has raised US$337m. The company acknowledged that it might reach its target through acquisitions from other producers, for which it would not exceed US$80/t of capacity.

India: The Economic Times has reported a forecasted profit growth for UltraTech Cement of 122% to US$119m over the three months to 31 December 2019 from US$53.6m in the corresponding period of 2018. It explained the boom in terms of increased sales, which may have risen by 7% year-on-year to US$1.50bn from US$1.40bn, and earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) per tonne – up by 45% to US$15.8/t from US$10.9/t. It predicted volumes growth of 3% year-on-year, dragged down by UltraTech subsidiary Century Cement’s falling production.

India: A 20 year old man has been arrested in Nalanda, Bihar for allegedly creating a fake UltraTech Cement website. The individual reportedly took payment for cement and then ceased contact, leaving genuine UltraTech Cement representatives in the state with angry enquiries. UltraTech then reported the site to police.

Police have stated that the arrested man, Rohit Kumar Balram Prasad, has been charged under sections 482 (using false property mark), 483 (counterfeiting a property mark used by another), 419 (cheating by personation) among others of the IPC and the Information Technology Act. They added that further arrests are expected.

India: Integrated cement and grinding plants expansions by companies including Dalmia Bharat, JK Cement and Aditya Birla subsidiary UltraTech of an additional 23Mt/yr are set to bring India’s total installed cement capacity to 508Mt/yr by the end of 2020. Business Standard newspaper has reported that steady prices year-on-year and ‘softening input costs’ have facilitated the expansions in spite of a ‘flattish trend in industry-wide volume growth.’