Global Cement News

A lot has happened since the 4 April 2014 announcement that Lafarge and Holcim intend to become LafargeHolcim. There have been several related announcements from around the global cement industry this week, prompting some interesting discussion with respect to the future look of the industry.

Oyak Group, which operates a number of plants in Turkey, appears to be limbering up for LafargeHolcim-based acquisitions in the UK, the EU or Africa, with aims to become a regional player. Meanwhile, Lafarge has pulled out of talks regarding its proposed acquisition of the Cementos Portland Valderrivas (CPV) plant in Vallcarca, Spain, directly citing the merger as the reason for this. We have also seen Colombia's Cementos Argos purchase a grinding plant in French Guiana, which was jointly-owned by Lafarge and Holcim. Announced just a few days after the merger, this asset was presumably jettisoned in order to avoid future issues with local anti-monopoly authorities. Finally, ACC and Ambuja have announced that they would retain their separate identities in India after the merger.

This flurry of announcements is likely to be just the start of frenzied speculation as the competitors of Lafarge and Holcim work out what assets are most likely to be sold. So what about the multinationals, Cemex and HeidelbergCement?

Cemex certainly has cause for concern, weighed down by the debt that it took on in 2007 with the acquisition of Australia's Rinker. It is in a relatively weak position with respect to acquiring any LafargeHolcim divestments. Could it lose market share? HeidelbergCement, by contrast, has long extoled the virtues of its financial efficiency policies and its diverse and forward-looking geographical spread. It could snap up more strategic assets after the merger. While both of these multinationals will be wary of dealing with an enlarged competitor in LafargeHolcim, they have the opportunity to increase their market shares and both will move up one position in the global cement producer rankings.

It is likely to be the smaller players that have the most to gain from the shedding of LafargeHolcim's various assets, especially those that enjoy strong domestic markets and have cash at the ready. Oyak Group has already entered the ring but what if Nigeria's Dangote, Brazil's Votorantim, Colombia's Cementos Argos or Thailand's SCG go on a spending spree? Could one of these rise to become a new global cement multinational?

However, if we can expect a change anywhere it will be in Spain. Following reports in 2012 that Spanish cement production had crashed to its lowest levels since the 1960s jobs have been shed and profits have evaporated. In 2013 Holcim and Cemex agreed to combine all of their operations in Spain. Roughly, according to the Global Cement Directory 2014, cement production capacity in Spain breaks down as follows: CPV (23%), Cemex (18%), Lafarge (11%) and Holcim (10%). Letting the Cemex-Holcim deal happen, followed by the Lafarge-Holcim merger and the CPV Vallcarca purchase, would have led to a major headache for Spain's competition authorities, creating an entity with 43% production market share! Unsurprisingly the first casualty has been the CPV Vallcarca deal. Whatever happens, the next 18 months will be an interesting period for the global cement industry.

The news that Holcim and Lafarge are planning a merger should come as no great surprise to long-term observers of the industry. Such mega-mergers have been periodically mooted over the decades and have already come to pass.

Lafarge took its present form through many acquisitions, but it was the mega-merger with Blue Circle Industries that brought it to pre-eminence. That deal was hard fought, rapidly becoming a hostile takeover after the then-CEO of Blue Circle, Richard Haythornthwaite, decided that the amount that the CEO of Lafarge, Bertrand Coulomb, was offering for his company was not high enough.

A year of claims, counter-claims, offers, rebuffs and haggling ensued, leading to a higher offer that was eventually accepted by the Blue Circle board. However, as Lafarge was a Euro-denominated company and Blue Circle was resolutely British (and was thinking in UK pounds sterling) after exchange rate variations had been taken into account, Lafarge paid less after a year than it had offered in he first place. The British CEO got a big pay-off and went on to greater glory, having appeared to extract a great deal more money (in GB pounds) for his shareholders. Apparently they teach this as a case study in business schools.

Mega-mergers have also shaped other giants in the industry. For example Chichibu-Onoda and Sumitomo-Osaka came together to make Taiheiyo Cement and Ciments Français was added to Italcimenti, although in this last case they still retain their separate identities. Often the deals amount to an accretive takeover by one larger company of a smaller one, but transformative deals consisting of a 'merger' of 'equals' also happen in the cement industry, and with good reason. The merging of research efforts; the optimisation of management; the rationalisation of procurement strategies: all of these will immediately save plenty of money.

However, it's on the financial side that these larger merged companies can sometimes see the most benefit. The cost of borrowing money is inversely proportional to the size of the company (and of the sums involved); the colossal sums demanded by overpaid and greedy bankers will diminish in proportion if the sums involved are larger. So, the cost of borrowing money to be able to invest in takeovers or for capital expenditure will reduce as a proportion of overall cost.

There are other significant potential savings as well, from operational synergies, although these can be harder to quantify and - critically - harder to retain once the competition technocrats have run their slide rules over the proposed deal. They generally do not like too much of the market ending in the hands of too few players.

A good case in point is the recent mega of Tarmac and Lafarge in the UK. To allow the deal to take place the merged company was obliged to sell off one of its key assets, the Hope cement plant, which is now owned and operated by newcomer Hope Construction Materials. Even after the deal has been completed, the market regulator is considering the possibility of making the merged company sell additional facilities, something that strikes Global Cement as 'just not on.'

However, with operations in 90 countries, Lafarge and Holcim can expect to face competition scrutiny in at least 15 countries including Brazil, Canada, Ecuador, France, the UK, the US, Morocco and the Philippines. Meanwhile, in Serbia it has been reported the two companies have a combined market share of 97% across all their business lines!

Lafarge and Holcim have overlapping facilities and distribution networks in a number of countries, and any merged company will probably be required to sell some of them to its competitors. Other companies might be licking their lips at the prospect, as usual CRH is already being lined up in the Irish press, but the units will be sold at a market rate - and not a penny less. It might be that the merged company cannot control which facilities are sold, meaning that they might end up with a less than optimised system. Not so good after all.

If the deal goes through, it will create a Europe-based behemoth with a production capacity of over 200Mt, enough to retain a place on the global top 10 companies with the ever-rationalising and concatenating Chinese companies. When the news first broke we asked what might the new company called? We liked a short mash-up of the two names, like Lolcim (a humorous nod to today's 'youth-speak' perhaps) or Hafarge. However, the level of preparation backing the merger plan soon became clear from financial due-diligence right down to a new name: LafargeHolcim.

Yet for all this co-ordinated work from companies that were meant to be competitors until as recently as March 2014, we should remember what happened to the proposed BHP Billiton-Rio Tinto takeover. Valued at a high of US$170bn it shrivelled up as the global economy collapsed in 2008 amidst concerns from regulators. The idea may be out there but LafargeHolcim has a long way to go before it actually exists.

Worldwide: Lafarge and Holcim have released plans regarding who will lead their proposed merger, LafargeHolcim. The chairman of the new board will be Wolfgang Reitzle, the future chairman of Holcim. Bruno Lafont, chairman and CEO of Lafarge will become CEO of the new group and member of the board.

Thomas Aebischer, Holcim's CFO will become CFO of the new group. Jean-Jacques Gauthier, Lafarge's CFO will become chief integration officer of the new group. The Executive Committee will be formed from both Lafarge and Holcim management.

In order to ensure efficient execution of the merger, an integration committee will prepare the integration plan to be implemented straight after the closing of the transaction. Bernard Fontana, Holcim's existing CEO will remain in charge of Holcim until completion of the transaction. He will co-chair the integration committee.

The merger is expected to be completed in the first half of 2015 subject to shareholder approval and regulatory approval in the many countries that the two multinational building materials producers operate in.

Our spotlight is on Uzbekistan this week following an update on the Almalyk Mining and Metallurgical Combine's (AMMC) plans to build a new cement plant in the south of the country. The news emerged in the wake of the completion of the AMMC's cement grinding plant, in the Jizzakh region, which was finished in late March 2014. Meanwhile, Eurocement announced that its subsidiary in Uzbekistan, the Akhangarancement plant, had received a limestone and marl quarrying licence.

Previous to the new AMMC grinding plant, Uzbekistan had five cement plants with a total cement production capacity of nearly 6Mt/yr. Only one of these was a dry production process plant, the 2.5Mt/yr Krzylkumcement plant, in the south-western Bukhara province. Cement consumption in the country was estimated to be around the same, also at 6Mt/yr.

Back in 2011 the government of Uzbekistan planned to invest US$6.94bn to develop infrastructure, transport and communication construction from 2011 - 2015. This investment has now been followed up with a direct financial injection into the cement industry.

In late February 2014, local building materials company JSC Uzbuildmaterials announced government plans to invest US$49.1m into the local cement industry. The programme includes nine projects for the three largest cement plants in the country: the Kyzylkumcement plant, the Ahangarancement plant and the Bekabadcement plant. Kyzylkumcement will receive the majority of the investment, US$39.6m to spend over three years on a new cement mill, upgrades to the clinker production lines and construction of a 220/10kV main substation. Ahangarantcement and Bekabadcement will replace 'out-dated' equipment and will upgrade their production lines.

Mineral-rich Uzbekistan is relatively undeveloped but this is changing. Its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was reported to be US$51bn in 2012 by the World Bank, having seen steady growth since 2002, and its population was just over 30m in 2013. Its cement consumption is 300kg/capita, a figure below the global average (estimated at 536kg/capita in a forthcoming Global Cement Magazine report on 'Cement consumption versus Gross Domestic Product'). This places Uzbekistan in a favourable position for future development on a graph of GDP per capita against cement consumption per capita. The latest investment programme suggests that the Uzbek government are hoping that this is the case.

Venezuela: Industries minister José David Cabello has overturned a resolution designating Gilberto Barrios Contreras as president of the Cemento Andino. Barrios Contreras was appointed to the post by the previous industries minister in a resolution dated 25 march 2014.