Analysis

The Construction Products Association (CPA) has just forecast a 25% drop in construction output for 2020 in the UK due to Covid-19. And this is the optimistic prediction! It blamed the decline, which is said to be the sharpest ever recorded, on the country’s coronavirus-related lockdown. 60% of planned construction output was lost in April 2020 due to social distancing measures. This compares to a 6.5% decline in gross domestic product (GDP) forecast for 2020 by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in April 2020 for the UK. OneStone Consulting’s Joe Harder in his Covid-19 Impact Analysis CIC 2025 report has forecast a 12.7% decrease in European cement production. Readers should keep in mind that construction output, GDP and cement production are all connected but not necessarily directly related.

Further details of note from the CPA include a direct link between the strength of lockdown measures and work lost, as well as differences between types of activity. So, for example, more construction output (in percentage terms) was reported lost in Scotland, where tighter lockdown measures were implemented. On the latter point, more output was lost in residential construction compared to non-residential with a similar trend reported in the repair, maintenance and improvement sector, again worsened in the residential part of this market. The sector that suffered the least was non-residential repair and maintenance as work on, currently, mostly deserted buildings and infrastructure was prioritised. One example of this may have been Aggregate Industries, the UK subsidiary of LafargeHolcim, which said this week that it had completed major works on the A14, a major regional trunk road, ahead of schedule. It didn’t directly make the link in its press release but quiet roads would have helped.

The CPA is touting the now-familiar range of letter-shaped economic recession shapes in the report, including ‘V’, ‘W’ and the dreaded ‘U’. However, the CPA’s Economics Director Noble Francis was more confident that infrastructure projects would bounce back fastest due to favourable investment cycles in utilities, government support for its high-speed railway scheme HS2 and, “greater ability to implement safe distancing for workers on larger sites.”

That last point ties in nicely with the operational guidance that the Mineral Product Association (MPA), the UK’s trade association for the heavy building material sector in the UK, released last week. This is all crucial information on a comprehensive and detailed scale along the lines released in other countries.

Much of this will be becoming second nature to cement industry workers and/or will be familiar to anyone who has watched US consultant John Kline discuss these issues on Global Cement Live. Yet there are some points worth discussing here such as ‘Avoid Distraction.’ This one’s all about remembering to keep in mind existing health and safety practices alongside all the coronavirus-related ones. All the usual health and safety regulations and advice remain in place and in some ways become even more important as there may be fewer staff working on socially-distanced sites, or first responders may be otherwise busy elsewhere. Another point from the MPA’s guidance is to ‘Provide More Time,’ which acknowledges that working with coronavirus measures will require more time. Other implications from a business changed by coronavirus are things like notifying the police when sites are closed and considering further security for such sites to minimise risk of theft. A lot of this stuff seems obvious but it’s easy to miss things.

For a recent review of the UK cement industry readers should refer to Edwin Trout’s feature in the June 2020 issue of Global Cement Magazine. One change since it was published has been Cemex’s proposal to mothball its 0.8Mt/yr South Ferriby integrated plant in Lincolnshire. The cement producer says it is not related to coronavirus but if the CPA’s predictions are accurate then it will make it that much harder to keep the plant open.

Everyone’s hoping for a ‘V’ shaped recovery from the coronavirus downturn in the UK and everywhere else around the world. Boots on the ground operating advice like that issued by the MPA and others is part of how the construction materials industries can work towards achieving this.

Huaxin Cement’s deal to buy ARM Cement’s assets in Tanzania has reportedly completed this morning. The Chinese cement producer will pour US$116m into Maweni Limestone to settle its liabilities and add another US$30m to complete plant construction and an upgrade, according to Reuters. Kenyan-based ARM Cement operates an integrated plant at Tanga and a grinding plant at Dar es Salaam.

Given the state of the world at the moment due to coronavirus the timing seems almost prophetic. There have been plenty of jingoistic warnings in Western media about renewed Chinese global dominance in the wake of the crisis. However, this agreement dates back to at least September 2019 when it was publicly announced, well before the current health scare. This is part of the Chinese expansion plan in Sub-Saharan Africa that’s been happening informally and formally since at least 2013. ARM Cement has seriously suffered since 2017 when cement demand fell in Kenya, a coal import ban in Tanzania caused production issues at its Tanga plant and increased competition hit both countries. It entered administration in the summer of 2018 and previous owner Pradeep Paunrana has been fighting PricewaterhouseCoopers’ attempts to sell the business to local rival National Cement. In some respects the timing of this deal may also be bad for Huaxin Cement given that it’s just suffered a 36% year-on-year drop in sales revenue to US$542m in the first quarter of 2020, related to the coronavirus outbreak. If the company can’t absorb this through the rest of the year then it might have a problem.

The real trend here in Chinese expansion strategy by its cement sector is a move from imports, building plants and co-financing projects to outright asset acquisition. This isn’t the first example either. West China Cement completed its purchase of a majority stake in Schwenk Namibia for US$104m in January 2020. This gave it control of Ohorongo Cement. Other recent Chinese moves in Sub-Saharan Africa include the supply of a modular grinding mill in Guinea by Sinoma and the competition of construction of a 1Mt/yr integrated plant in Lubudi Territory in Democratic Republic of Congo by another CNBM subsidiary, Tianjin Cement Industry Design and Research Institute.

An outlier from the more ‘traditional’ Chinese routes of either supplying equipment and/or co-financing cement plants in Africa has been the CNBM/Sinoma plan to build a 7Mt/yr ‘mega’ plant in Tanzania. Once completed it will nearly double local clinker production! Unsurprisingly, when it was first announced it was pitched towards the export market. Cement producers in East Africa might do well to remind themselves what has happened in Egypt since the 13Mt/yr government/army-run El-Arish Cement plant at Beni Suef opened in 2018: the over-supplied market collapsed. Together with the Huaxin Cement purchase, once the CNBM project completes, Chinese companies will own the majority of cement production capacity in Tanzania.

Looking at Sub-Saharan Africa, Chinese cement producers look set to benefit from any potential economic realignment following the coronavirus pandemic due to their conservative approach in expanding overseas. By investing cautiously and generally avoiding large-scale international acquisitions and mergers they have insulated themselves relatively well from any potential economic crisis. One weakness though is a reliance on the strong Chinese domestic market. If, say, it declines over a longer period due to the coronavirus crisis or ever reaches more ‘normal’ per-capita cement consumption figures then expanding too slowly overseas might look like the wrong strategy in retrospect. Yet, if western competitors start retreating further then the temptation to start to buy assets in bulk may grow. Another risk is how badly the coronavirus outbreak hits countries in Africa. The combination of poor healthcare systems, younger populations and warmer climates make it extremely unpredictable. Fortune may favour the bold but slow success seems to be working well for Chinese producers so far.

Many of the first quarter financial results are in from the multinational cement producers and a few points are worth discussing. As usual a few caveats are worth mentioning such as seasonal and geographical variations between companies, such as producers in the northern hemisphere experiencing a generally slower period. It’s also worth noting that this is a selective look at some of the larger cement producers as not all of them release detailed figures at this stage and others have been delayed. However, the economic effects of the coronavirus lockdowns are clearly showing an effect in a kind of wave as the pandemic has spread.

Graph 1: Sales revenues in the first quarter of 2020 from selected cement producers. Source: Company financial reports.

Graph 1 above shows the effects of the earlier lockdown in China upon the results of the Chinese producers like CNBM, Anhui Conch and China Resources Cement (CRC). What’s interesting with these companies is that they have all suffered revenue hits of 20 – 25%. Huaxin Cement, a producer based in Hubei province near Wuhan where the Chinese lockdown was strictest, is not shown in Graph 1 but its revenue fell by 35% in the first quarter. See GCW452 for more on coronavirus effects on the Chinese cement industry.

Looking more widely, both LafargeHolcim and HeidelbergCement suffered declines of around 10%. This is somewhat misleading as both companies are constantly selling assets making the like-for-like results not quite as bad, particularly in the case of LafargeHolcim with its South-East Asian divestments. Although note this week that LafargeHolcim’s deal to sell its majority stake in Holcim Philippines lapsed this week due to the local competition regulator not granting permission in time. Yet, they are also beneficiaries and victims to an extent of their wide geographical spread with worse performance in Asia and better results in North America. For a fuller look at LafargeHolcim’s first quarter results see last week’s column. The rest of the producers featured generally reflect their tighter market spread with Buzzi Unicem particularly benefiting from the relatively untouched market in the US. Shree Cement, an Indian producer, escaped relatively unscathed, possibly as the Indian lockdown only started in late March 2020. All eyes will be on the results of UltraTech Cement, the largest producer in India, when they finally emerge.

Graph 2: Cement sales volumes in the first quarter of 2020 from selected cement producers. Source: Company financial reports.

Cement sales volumes tell a similar story, although a few different companies are featured in Graph 2. Note CRC’s year-on-year fall of 26% to 11.2Mt in the first quarter. It’s the only larger Chinese cement producer that we’ve found so far that has released sales volumes. Semen Indonesia is interesting too because its figures jumped in January 2020 as its acquisition of Holcim Indonesia only went on the books in February 2019. It’s February and March sales volumes have each been 4 - 5% down year-on-year but it’s far from clear whether this is due to general production overcapacity in the country or from the global health crisis. Despite this, its export volumes from both the mainland and its TLCC subsidiary in Vietnam have held up well. Unfortunately though, its performance in Vietnam may be an outlier if data from the General Department of Vietnam Customs is to be believed this week. It indicated that overall cement exports from the country fell by 9.7% year-on-year to 7.73Mt in the first quarter of 2020. Cementos Argos is also worth looking at as it suffered from the government lockdown in Colombia despite having an international presence in the Caribbean and the US.

Most of the world’s largest cement producers are preparing for the economic shockwaves from lockdowns to hit balance sheets in the second quarter of 2020. Many have said exactly this and have paraded their liquidity levels in preparation. Alongside this the results of the Chinese producers in the next quarter may offer some light on what kind of recovery is possible from easing lockdown measures. Yet the risk of second waves of infections from coronavirus potentially jeopardises any kind of fast or easy recovery without a vaccine. Today’s news that Cemex is considering mothballing its integrated plant at South Ferriby in the UK has been blamed on an analysis of the company’s European cement supply chain. The company says it is not related to coronoavirus but it does suggest the company is making savings.

This week has seen international press coverage return to Wuhan, China and South Korea where small numbers of infections have started to build despite being thought mostly eradicated. No one wants the so-called ‘W’ economic recovery with its rollercoaster ride of crests and dips or indeed the ‘L’ with its slow tail of recovery. Yet, for better or for worse, some form of normality has to return after the lockdowns end. The UK, for example, the country with the worst death rate from coronanvirus in Europe, has allowed its construction workers to pick up tools this week. If and when they can do so in the UK and everywhere else without causing the basic reproduction number (R₀) to rise then the future starts to look a little brighter.

LafargeHolcim’s first quarter results last week bore all the signs of a prizefighter on the receiving end of a punch. It’s taking pain now but it’s likely to be temporary. A volley of market disruption caused by coronavirus-related government lockdowns can be seen wreaking havoc steadily across its different geographical reporting areas. Asia Pacific region has been most affected so far, followed by its Middle East Africa, Europe, South America and North America regions. That last one didn’t show any top-line financial effects from health control measures, although they are surely coming. The worst is yet to come as chief executive officer (CEO) Jan Jenisch said, “The biggest impact from Covid-19 is expected in Q2. The full impact of the crisis on the company’s 2020 results cannot be assessed at this point.”

Depending on how easing the lockdowns plays out, LafargeHocim’s multinational nature may cushion it from the worst effects. Despite the group’s cement sales volumes falling in the first quarter in most regions on a like-for-like basis, it performed strongly in North America with an 8% rise year-on-year to 3.6Mt. Aggregate and concrete volumes were also up, as well as net sales and earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA). Sadly, this is about to change. Most of Europe brought in its lockdown measures in early to mid-March but the US enacted its own lockdown later. The group was quick to point out that it had found the April 2020 data on the rebound of activity in China ‘encouraging.’ If this is the pattern for all regions and second waves are suppressed without resorting to more lockdowns then the group’s wide geographical presence may help it.

As discussed a few weeks ago the major multinational building materials producer is actually in a better position for the unexpected given its success in reducing its debt levels in recent years, notably following divestments in South-East Asia in 2018 and 2019As discussed a few weeks ago the major multinational building materials producer is actually in a better position for the unexpected given its success in reducing its debt levels in recent years, notably following divestments in South-East Asia in 2018 and 2019. Naturally, it was keen to point this out in its press release with talk of its net financial debt to recurring EBITDA of 1.5x as at the end 2019, liquidity of Euro7.5bn in cash and credit lines and a Baa2/outlook stable credit rating from Moody’s in late April 2020. That sense of confidence was later reinforced with, “The building industry is resilient and expected to benefit from future recovery plans from governments and central banks.” This last point is important given that most economic recovery plans tend to involve building things.

HeidelbergCement’s financial results for the first quarter of 2020 are due out on 7 May 2020. Once these come in, some sort of comparison between the larger multinational cement producers, including Cemex and CRH, will be possible. However, the different geographical footprint of each of these companies will hinder this kind of analysis given the progressive way the coronavirus outbreak has spread. In the meantime check out Global Cement Magazine’s feature on the North American cement market (written before the lockdowns) and be sure to register for Global Cement Live this week, which includes an update on the US from consultant John Kline.

The headline from the cement section of FLSmidth’s first quarter results summed up what may be the current situation for many companies supplying the sector: “service relatively stable – cautious on capex.” The general picture across both its mining and cement businesses was ‘significantly’ increased demand for local resources, remote support and digital products. On the mining side FLSmidth pointed out that it was impossible to assess the impact of coronavirus on its business because of the difference between government policies. Some places continue lockdowns or impose additional restrictions but others are starting to ease them. This point has ramifications for multinational cement producers and other suppliers too. It seems likely to continue during the coming months as lockdowns ease at different rates in different countries.

On cement specifically, FLSmidth provided a good global view of what the pandemic and government responses are actually doing to the industry. It reports that around 80% of the world's cement plants (excluding China) are currently in operation with some operating at reduced capacity. It described the market for services as ‘relatively stable’ in the first quarter but that cement consumption was being reduced by lower construction activity, plant shutdowns and restricted access to sites leading to reduced demand for technical services and commissioning. By region it identified the biggest impact to its business from coronavirus in India and the Middle East. Generally, it says that cement producers are suspending capital investments until the impact of coronavirus on economies is clearer. There has been some good news though, with the supplier noting that several of its customers have been looking for services that can reduce their operational costs.

The European Commission tackled this pervading sense of uncertainty in its roadmap towards lifting coronavirus containment measures that was published on 15 April 2020. The Committee for European Construction Equipment (CECE) was keen to share this with its members this week, pointing out how the European Union (EU) plans to lift border controls and re-start economic activity.

The plan is to ease travel restrictions between border regions for cross-border and seasonal workers, and then between European areas with low coronavirus infection rates. External borders can later be reopened with access by non-EU residents to the EU scheduled for a second stage. To re-start economic activity the EU recommends, again, a phased approach focusing on sectors that are ‘essential’ to facilitate economic activity such as transport. The commission says it will also create a rapid alert function to identify supply and value chain disruptions, relying on existing networks such as Enterprise Europe Network (EEN), clusters, chambers of commerce and trade associations, small and medium enterprise (SME) envoys and more. Whether the EU can actually coordinate a return to normality following its poor response in aiding Italy at the start of the European outbreak of coronavirus remains to be seen. Yet, its historical roots as an economic community dating back to the Treaty of Rome in 1957 suggests it may be more successful when coordinating technical aspects of trade.

Detailed above are the views and plans of just one supplier and one continental organisation, although they are both prominent. The takeaway from this is that uncertainty is a major problem so far for the cement industry in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak. Companies have faced a cash crunch in the short term as economies slowed down and they are reluctant to release cash until the future becomes clearer. Large parts of the cement industry and its suppliers are very international, which exposes it to even more uncertainty. Different countries enforcing different restrictions and different easing strategies at different times create a major headache for everyone and a block to investment. Making cement is undeniably an essential industry and this realisation by legislators can be seen in some countries that at first shut down their plants before understanding that they needed them open after all! Suppliers should benefit from this too, although at reduced activity levels. We don’t know what kind of recovery will come – hopefully one releasing plenty of pent up demand. Yet one thing is certain. The work of the regional cement associations and those representing suppliers is going to be crucial in the coming months.