Displaying items by tag: Forecast

US: Ed Sullivan, the Portland Cement Association’s (PCA) Senior Vice President and Chief Economist says that economic momentum supported by tax reform and federal infrastructure programs will play key roles in the demand for construction in the next few years. Sullivan made his comments at the World of Concrete event in Las Vegas, where he revealed details from his forthcoming spring forecast.

“There is little doubt that the near-term outlook for construction and cement consumption in 2018 and 2019 remains favourable,” said Sullivan. “Strengthening economic conditions, with the addition of fiscal stimulus, and in the context of already low unemployment could awaken inflationary pressures. Down the road, this could lead to an even more stringent monetary policy, leading to an acceleration in interest rate increases and an eventual cooling of construction markets. If this scenario plays out, it will likely take time to gestate and not materialise to a significant degree until after 2019.”

Sullivan noted the strong economy comes in context of continued strain to find skilled workers, including those needed for construction projects. Weather conditions and other economic factors prompted PCA to revise its 2017 Fall Forecast down slightly, though it says that its ‘fundamental’ assessments pertaining to the economy, construction markets, and cement consumption remain on target.

The PCA Spring Forecast will be released in early March 2018.

Indonesia: Semen Indonesia forecasts that domestic cement consumption will grow at a rate of 5 – 7% year-on-year in 2018, a lower rate than the level of 7.8% recorded for the first 11 months of 2017. Semen Indonesia corporate secretary Agung Wiharto said that the prediction was based on continued demand for cement from government infrastructure projects, according to the Jakarta Post. The company also took other factors - such as inflation, political stability and market confidence - into account in its sales projection. Indocement has also forecast a cement consumption growth rate of 5 – 6% in 2018. Both companies reported reduced earnings in the third quarter of 2017.

India: The credit agency ICRA forecasts that rising energy and freight costs due to higher pet coke, coal and diesel prices during the first half of 2017 – 2018 financial year may hit the profits of cement producers. Petcoke prices grew by 32% year-on-year in the first half of the year and coal prices rose by 44%, according to the Press Trust of India. Sabyasachi Majumdar, an analyst at ICRA, said that higher power, fuel and freight costs were likely to continue. He added that the ability of cement companies to raise their prices was crucial to maintaining profit levels.

Ed Sullivan, the Portland Cement Association’s (PCA) chief economist was in tub-thumbing mood last week at the IEEE-IAS/PCA Cement Conference in Calgary, Canada. The headline figures that the PCA put out in a press release was a forecast of a 3.5% rise in cement consumption in 2018 and 2019. Yet behind this in a stirring speech given to a cement industry crowd craving growth was a tale of riches ahead. The audience lapped it up. There was only one problem: nothing has really happened yet to make any if this happen. It always seems to be riches ahead. As Sullivan freely put it, “Trump policies will impact cement… But we don’t know what they are!”

Sullivan broke down his forecast into three sections that hinged around President Trump’s desired policy changes kicking in from about the third quarter of 2019. At this point, owing to lack of information about what the Trump administration actually wants to do, Sullivan freely broke open the assumptions. These covered issues such as a tax reform, infrastructure budgeting, immigration reforms and more. As he explained it all of these issues interact, so that reducing taxes potentially pushes national debt up making infrastructure spending harder. Owing to the lack of specifics from the current administration though Sullivan was forced to resort to the more solid plans of Democratic presidential contenders Hillary Clinton and even Bernie Saunders for nuggets of information of how ‘a government’ might act. For example, he used a breakdown of Saunders’s intended infrastructure spend to try and predict how Trump’s policies could play out. Increases in highway building from the overall infrastructure spend in this context being good news for the cement industry. And as for Sullivan’s view on the impact of the Trump border wall: ‘overrated’.

The new forecasts for 2018 and 2019 appear to be retrenchment given that the PCA was predicting growth of 4% for 2016 in the middle of that year. It subsequently reduced its estimate to 2.7% for 2016 by December 2016 after the presidential election. However its figures for 2017 and 2018 have increased since the December forecast. Sullivan predicted that growth will start to surpass 5% in 2020 once Trump’s policies have time to make waves. The crescendo of his presentation at the IEEE-IAS/PCA was a prognostication of an extra requirement of 14Mt of cement in 2021 and 2022. Sullivan topped this off by saying that, “We have the supply infrastructure in place right now.” However, some delegates informally questioned afterwards where that cement might actually come from with mass international clinker capacity waiting in the wings from places like Vietnam and new cement plants such as the McInnis Cement plant in Quebec expressively targeted at the US import market about to come on line.

Sullivan has a tricky job trying to predict what will happen next in the US cement industry and sometimes his forecasts seems to change as much as the weather that cement company financial reports often blame their poor returns on. This column knows a little bit how he feels. As Sullivan’s biography points out he’s been cited by the Chicago Federal Reserve as the most accurate forecaster regarding economic growth among 30 top economists. In short he’s the best we’ve got. But Donald Trump’s approach to government so far has made his job exponentially harder. As we’ve said more than a few times when describing the US cement market, the basis are there for growth but something is holding back faster growth. Will Trump be the catalyst to break the 5% growth barrier? Looks like we’ll have to wait until late 2019 to find out.

Elsewhere, the conference brought together a large cross-section of the North American industry. Surprisingly perhaps given the change in leadership at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) several parts of the speaker and discussion programme focused on coping with National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), carbon tax schemes in Canada and California and practical carbon capture methods at the plant level. The key here seemed to be a piecemeal approach that may not necessarily be at odds with less government environmental legislation. Next year’s outing in Nashville, Tennessee looks set to be an even more important event, especially if more on Trump's infrastructure plans become known.

This week the US Portland Cement Association (PCA) revised down its forecast for the rise in cement consumption in 2016 to 2.7% from 4%. It also lowered its prediction for 2017, blaming political uncertainty around the presidential election, inflation and slower construction activity. Global Cement Magazine editorial director Robert McCaffrey pointed out on LinkedIn that he was surprised by the revision down in 2017 given the rhetoric by president-elect Donald Trump to invest in large infrastructure projects.

Clearly the PCA is playing it cautious as a politically unknown entity, Trump, slides from campaign trail promises to executive power delivery. Backing them up are the latest figures from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) that show that both cement production and shipments fell slightly in the third quarter of 2016. In the quarter before the election in November 2016 the cement market slowed down. The hard bit is working out why. As we pointed out in a review of the US cement industry in the May 2016 issue of Global Cement Magazine the PCA had previously downgraded its forecast in 2016 due to economic uncertainty despite strong fundamentals for the construction industry. Then, as now, the great hope for the US cement industry was infrastructure spending down the pipeline, at that time the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act. At this point it doesn’t seem to have had much of an effect.

Industrial and economic forecasters aren’t the only ones who have a hard time of it in 2016. Political pollsters have also been caught out. Surprises came from the UK’s decision to leave the European Union and the election of Trump. Neither result was widely expected in the media. As explained above, should Trump make good on his building plans then if any cement company based its plans on a forecast dependent on a Hilary Clinton win then it may have lost money.

The power of forecasts has even greater potential effects in developing markets where the corresponding financial risks and rewards are higher. After all, why would any cement company invest tens of millions of US dollars for a cement grinding plant or hundreds of millions for an integrated plant unless there was some whiff of a return on investment?

This then leads to the problems Dangote has reportedly been having with its plant in Tanzania. Amidst a flurry of local media speculation in late November 2016 about why its Mtwara plant had a temporary production shutdown, Dangote’s country chief clarified that it was due to technical problems. It then emerged this week that Dangote’s owner Aliko Dangote met with President John Magufuli to agree a gas supply agreement to the plant. The point here being that even if the market conditions and demographics seems conducive to profit, as is the case in Tanzania, if the local government changes any incentives agreed at the planning stage then everything can change. At this point forecasts based on data become moot.

There’s a great quote from the US pollster Nate Silver that goes, “The key to making a good forecast is not in limiting yourself to quantitative information.” In terms of election campaigns run at a time of upheaval that might mean listening to people more than looking at polling data. In terms of a cement company operating in Africa that might mean fostering links with the local government to ensure no sudden policy changes catch you off-guard. And in the US that might just mean cement company analysts have to follow Donald Trump’s Twitter account.

US cement consumption may have disappointed some in the first quarter of 2013 but solid growth lies ahead, according to the Portland Cement Association (PCA). Just how solid that growth will be remains open to interpretation.

PCA chief economist Ed Sullivan forecast 8% growth in cement consumption at the start of 2013. Now's its been halved to just 4%. Yet he's standing by the hint of good news ahead, upping the growth from 2014 to 9.7%.

Figures from the major US cement producers present a mixed picture. The major multinational cement producers mostly suffered from the weather in early 2013. Lafarge saw its cement sales in North America drop by 23% year-on-year for the first half of 2013 to 4.4Mt from 5.7Mt in the same period of 2012. Cemex's cement sales in the US rose by 3% but no specific figures were released. Holcim's cement sales in North America fell by 7% to 5Mt from 5.4Mt. HeidelbergCement's cement sales in the North America grew by 5% to 5.7Mt from 5.4Mt.

Of the rest, Texas Industries reported a rise in cement shipments of 29% to 2.23Mt from 1.73Mt for the six months to the 31 May 2013. Titan saw sales in the US rise by 10% to US$258m.

Preliminary United States Geological Survey data for June 2013 suggests that the increase in portland and blended cement shipments in the US slowed in the first half of 2013. In 2011 32.1Mt were shipped, in 2012 37.0Mt were shipped and in 2013 37.2Mt were shipped.

Meanwhile the construction figures US Department of Commerce mostly suggested growth but not without the odd jitter. Construction spending fell slightly in June 2013. Total construction spending adjusted seasonally fell by 0.4% to US$869bn due to a fall in non-residential construction. Since then though the July 2013 figure hit US$901bn, the highest since June 2009.

Accordingly, in his forecast Sullivan pins his hopes on the residential sector in the near term. It has seen consistent growth since October 2012. However other industry commentators, like the American Institue of Architects, have focused on poor growth in non-residential construction.

Let's hope Sullivan's got it right.

Cement industry results from China have all told an alarming story this week: profits for the first half of 2012 look set to fall by more than 50% year-on-year.

China Resources Cement Holdings warned that its first-half earnings were down sharply. China National Materials Co. Ltd. (Sinoma), the cement equipment and engineering services provider, and Gansu Qilianshan Cement, a small Shanghai-listed cement producer, have both forecast similar drops. Sinoma blamed its drop in profit partly on an overseas project but 'interestingly' no further information was released detailing which project.

Previous to this in June 2012 Anhui Conch Cement warned that its net profit would fall by more than 50% due to weak demand and falling product prices. In May 2012 China National Building Material Co Ltd (CNBM) reported that its net profit for the first quarter of 2012 was down by 45% year-on-year. In April 2012 Jidong Cement reported an increase in its net loss for the first quarter and a year-on-year revenue drop of 14%.

Each of the Chinese big players in the cement industry have issued profit warnings of a similar scale suggesting that the Chinese market faces a uniform downturn or that a slowdown is being centrally managed. Official signs that the Chinese industry faced a slowdown emerged in March 2012 when the national growth target was lowered, analysts' predictions were released forecasting weakened profits for the nation's main producers and government officials admitted that overcapacity loomed within five years.

According to OneStone Research data on the Chinese market in 2010 CNBM, Anhui Conch, Jidong and Sinoma represented over 20% of Chinese capacity. To give these figures some perspective, in 2011 CNBM's profit was US$1.7bn. Holcim's operating profit for the same period was US$2bn and Lafarge's operating income was US$2.74bn. Even halved, CNBM's profit is a massive figure for a company with less of an international presence than the European multinationals.

Indonesia: It seems that not a week goes past without a forecast, announcement or other report about the continued boom in the Indonesian cement industry. Similarly, there is a steady stream of expansion announcements to accommodate the future demand. In light of another round of impressive cement statistics, what's the story for Indonesia in 2012 and beyond?

In the three months to 31 March 2012 Indonesia produced 12.5Mt of cement, an 18% rise on the first quarter of 2011. In the whole of that year, the cement industry turned out a massive 17% more cement than in 2010. These headline increases are certainly impressive and show that if the first quarter of 2012 was repeated three more times throughout the rest of the year, Indonesia would hit its 53Mt production forecast. This is more than double the cement production of 1998 (22Mt/yr in the midst of the Asian banking crisis) and, while from a low base, the values represent incredible sustained year-on-year demand growth.

But what is the potential of the Indonesian cement industry? This can be assessed by looking one of Indonesia's neighbours, namely Malaysia, and doing a quick thought-experiment. What would the Indonesian cement industry look like if the country were to suddenly develop demands and cement consumption patterns like Malaysia does today? Indonesia has a population 8.3 times higher than Malaysia¹ and a cement consumption/capita rate approximately 2.4 times lower.² Assuming current Indonesian cement consumption to be 50Mt, if all of the people in Indonesia were to suddenly start using cement like Malaysia does today, the country's cement industry would have to be nearly 1000Mt/yr to support demand!

While this is clearly not the case today and is unlikely to be fully realised, Indonesia will continue to develop economically. As it does, the world's fourth most populous nation will need more cement. How much is open to debate, but even if a small percentage of that hypothetical 1000Mt can be realised, it will certainly justify the current rush to add extra capacity. This is now especially likely in light of the December 2011 relaxation of land acquisition rules, which will make it easier to build both cement projects and the large construction projects that need cement.

Click here for much more on the cement industries of Indonesia and Malaysia (as well as Vietnam) from the April 2012 issue of Global Cement Magazine.

1. CIA World Factbook website, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook.

2. Cement consumption per capita data for Malaysia taken from Lafarge 2010 Annual Report. (http://www.lafarge.com/04112011-customers_activities-cement_market_2010-uk.pdf). Malaysia is a representative comparison for Indonesia based on its GDP to cement consumption ratio.