Displaying items by tag: CRH

The last week marked a step change to the US industry with the news that Ireland’s CRH has agreed to buy Ash Grove Cement. The latter is the largest remaining cement producer still owned by an American company. Its history dates back 135 years to its founding in 1882, with links to the Sunderland family for over a century. Following the acquisition, each of the top five cement producing firms in the US will be operated by multinational corporations based in foreign countries.

Although this scenario is not new to many other countries around the world, it is rare for a nation with a cement industry of this scale. The US is the third biggest cement producer worldwide. Out of the top ten cement producing nations Global Cement Magazine identified in its Top 100 Report 2017 feature in December 2016 only Egypt doesn’t have a local company to match the multinationals. China has China National Building Material (CNBM), for example and India has UltraTech cement and so on and so forth.

The actual sale covers Ash Grove Cement’s eight cement plants and 23 cement terminals, as well as its ready mix concrete and aggregate businesses, for US$3.5bn. Altogether its cement plants have a production capacity of 9.5Mt/yr and this really puts into contrast the Cementir Italia deal last week. HeidelbergCement has agreed to buy that company for around Euro57/t. CRH is buying Ash Grove Cement for US$368/t. That’s more that five times as much!

To be fair they are very different markets, with Italy’s cement sector consolidating near the bottom of a business cycle and the US growing with some promise. For comparison with other recent US acquisitions, CRH is offering to pay about the same as Summit Materials did to Lafarge for a cement plant and seven terminals in mid-2015. Other than that a few of the more recent transactions have been between US$200 – 300/t. The gradual price inflation for cement production capacity indicates that there is confidence in the US cement market.

In terms of CRH’s enhanced presence in North America following the completion of the deal, it currently operates two cement plants in the US: the American Cement Sumterville plant in Florida, a joint venture with Elementia, and the Trident plant in Montana. The CRH US division also runs five terminals in the Midwest and Northeast. This compliments Ash Grove Cement’s presence in the West, Midwest and South. Throw in CRH’s Canadian cement plants in Ontario and Quebec and CRH has the makings of a seriously strong cement business in North America. The only obvious impediment could be the close proximity of the CRH Trident plant and the Ash Grove Cement Montana City plant. Both are in Montana within 115km of each other and they are the only integrated plants in the state. A Federal Trade Commission arranged divestment in this location seems likely.

Ash Grove Cement’s chairman Charlie Sunderland, described CRH as his company’s biggest customer when the acquisition was announced. Buying Ash Grove Cement fills in one more piece in CRH’s construction materials puzzle in North America. Its American divisions have generated more than half of its revenue since at least 2014 dominating asphalt, aggregate and ready mix concrete markets. Yet it has lacked a cement market presence to match this. This changes when the deal with Ash Grove Cement completes.

Ireland: Maeve Carton plans to retire as Group Transformation Director of CRH and from its board on 31 August 2017. Since joining CRH in 1988, Maeve has held a number of senior financial roles prior to joining the board as Finance Director in May 2010. She was appointed Group Transformation Director in January 2016.

Germany: Opterra, the German subsidiary of Ireland’s CRH, has announced a change of plant manager at its Karsdorf plant. Berthold Perschall, 50, will take over from Giuseppe De Donno on 1 June 2017. De Donno has been in the post since July 2015 and has left the company to pursue a new professional challenge.

Perschall has been with CRH (and Lafarge beforehand) since 2000. Before coming to the Karsdorf plant in 2009 he worked at Lafarge’s Sötenich and Wössingen plants. He was most recently the head of maintenance and production at Karsdorf.

Finland: Miikka Riionheimo has been appointed as the chief executive officer (CEO) of Finnsementti with effect from 1 June 2017. He will replace the current CEO Kalervo Matikainen when he retires. Riionheimo has worked in a variety of roles for Hella since 2004 and also worked for Sandvik. He became the chief operating officer of Finnsementti in 2016.

Ukraine: The supervisory board of Podilsky Cement has appointed Leonard Barry as its supervisory board chairperson. Previously, he was the director of CRH in the country, according to the Ukrainian News Agency. Barry, aged 52 years, is an Irish national. He joined Irish Cement in 1989 as a process engineer before becoming its managing director in 2011. He trained as a chemical engineer at University College Dublin and holds an MBA from the University of Limerick.

Other personnel changes include the appointment of Declan Maguire, CRH’s chief operational director for Eastern Europe, as deputy supervisory board chairperson. Alan Connolly has also been appointed as secretary of the supervisory board.

The Philippines has been messing up the balance sheets of cement producers so far in 2017. Over the last week Holcim Philippines, CRH and Cemex have each reported lacklustre first quarter results dragged down by poor performance in the country. CRH’s chief executive officer Albert Manifold seemed to receive the worst kicking when analysts in a conference call refused to let it pass that the company’s sales had dropped by 12% year-on-year in Asia. Although to be fair to him the group’s Asian division only represented 2% of global sales at Euro0.5bn…

CRH’s quarterly financial reports tend to be in the form of sparse trading updates. So this lack of detail and CRH’s plans to invest over Euro300m in the market may have prompted Manifold’s grilling. According to the Irish Times he blamed the situation on cheap imports from south-east Asia pulling down the price. He then defended the investment on the grounds that local producers would have an advantage as they increase production capacity due to constant production and ‘guaranteed’ regulation and certification.

CRH isn’t the only organisation that has been burned by the Philippines. Before Christmas this column was praising the local industry for being in a boom. Cement sales had risen by 10.1% year-on-year to 20.1Mt according to CEMAP data in the first nine months of 2016 and the Duterte Infrastructure Plan was starting to target hundreds of billions of US dollars towards infrastructure spending. In the end cement sales rose by 6.6% to 26Mt for the full year in 2016 and this was a solid performance despite being brought down by the fourth quarter.

From the cement producers mentioned above, Cemex reported that its Ordinary Portland Cement sales volumes fell by 9% in the first quarter. It blamed the fall on bad weather and a tough quarter to compare against in 2015. Holcim Philippines said that its net sales fell by 12% to US$176m and it attributed it to lower public infrastructure spending, tighter industry competition and higher production expenses. Eagle Cement meanwhile, the fourth of the country’s major producers, is preparing to float on the local stock market in May 2017 to fund an expansion drive. The poor results of the other three cement producers may dent its proceeds from the initial public offering (IPO).

The words CRH’s Albert Manifold used in his defence were that, “Brand matters over there.” Funnily enough the other big Philippines cement industry news story that has been rumbling away for the last few months is an investigation by the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) into the conduct of the Cement Manufacturers Association of the Philippines (CEMAP) and some of the leading cement producers. Naturally this includes CRH’s joint venture Republic Cement. The enquiry was prompted in mid-2016 by the accusation of anti-competitive agreements by a former trade official. He also made direct allegations against Ernesto Ordonez, the head of CEMAP. The investigation is on-going and perhaps it will find out exactly how much ‘brand matters’ in the Philippines.

Construction firm DMCI Holdings announced plans this week to enter the Philippine cement market. The company intends to build one cement plant on Semirara and three cement grinding plants elsewhere – at Batangas, Iloilo and Zamboanga – to give it a national presence. DMCI’s managing director Victor Limlingan admitted to local press that his company was taking a gamble on spending US$368m in this way.

It has staked its money on the Duterte Infrastructure Plan, a scheme from the new administration that was elected in June 2016 to target US$165bn (!) towards infrastructure spending until the early 2020s. Even if a portion of this money makes it from political hyperbole to the diggers then it is likely to mean a sustained construction boom for an economy that is already growing at around 6%/yr. DCMI’s excitement was almost palpable in mid-November 2016 when it put out a press release calling for potential partners to help it benefit from the rush when it comes. Although the company did add that all the discussions were at the exploratory stage at this time because it was still awaiting bidding documents.

DMCI’s project joins six plants in various stages of planning and construction from San Miguel, Northern Cement, Eagle Cement and LafargeHolcim. In addition four existing plants are carrying out upgrades to increase their production capacity. Clearly, things are looking up for the local cement industry. DMCI follows San Miguel which announced that it was going to spend US$1bn on building five cement plants around the country in mid-2015.

In line with this kind of investment the Cement Manufacturers Association of the Philippines (CEMAP) said that cement sales had risen by 10.1% year-on-year to 20.1Mt in the first three quarters of 2016. This follows annual sales growth of 8.7% to 21.3Mt in 2014 and of 14.3% to 24Mt in 2015. CEMAP’s data for 2015 also shows that local demand overtook the country’s kiln capacity in 2014. Subsequently imports peaked to 314,000t in 2014, the highest level since 2002.

The country’s second largest producer Republic Cement, a joint venture between CRH and Aboitiz, reported sales growth similar to CEMAP’s one for the first three months of the year. LafargeHolcim, the largest producer, didn’t reveal any figures in its third quarter report but it marked the Philippines as one of its key contributors in the quarter. By contrast, Cemex noted lower growth in its third quarter report at 4% for the nine months to September 2016. It also said that the government transition following the election had slowed cement consumption, especially from infrastructure projects.

The Philippine cement industry is in the enviable position of being in a boom. The kind of problems it has to cope with includes provincial cement shortages, lobbying to increase usage of blended cements, scrutiny of prices by the government and a rise in technical smuggling. Once the new plants and upgrades start becoming operational the true nature of the market should become more apparent. At present it looks likely that DCMI gamble may turn out to be a wise one. The next question will be how many more companies want a piece of the piece too?

Ireland: Rebecca McDonald has resigned from the board of CRH with immediate effect. The non-executive director for the building materials producer cited family commitments as her reason for resigning.

Ireland: Mark Towe has confirmed his intention to retire from the CRH Board at the end of 2016. Towe, who joined CRH in 1997 and was appointed a CRH Director in July 2008, will continue in his role as Chairman, CRH Americas.

In April 2016 the shareholders of BP voted against a pay package of US$20m for the company's chief executive officer (CEO) Bob Dudley. The vote was non-binding to BP but it clearly sent a message to the management. Subsequently, the chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg acknowledged the mood amongst the company's investors and stated in his speech at the annual general meeting that, "We hear you. We will sit down with our largest shareholders to make sure we understand their concerns and return to seek your support for a renewed policy."

The link to the cement industry here is that many of the world's major cement producers are public companies. Similar to BP they internally set CEO and leading executive pay and remuneration packages. Just like BP, cement companies too could run into similar complaints from their shareholders, for example, should the construction and cement markets have similar jolts that the oil industry has faced since mid-2014.

To be clear: this article is not attempting to pass judgement on how much these CEOs are being compensated. It is merely seeing how compensation compares amongst a selection of leading cement companies. LafargeHolcim's revenue in 2015 was greater than the gross domestic product of over 90 countries. Running companies of this size is a demanding job. What is interesting here is how it compares and what happens when it is perceived to have grown too high, as in the case of BP.

It should also be noted that this is an extremely rough comparison of the way CEO pay and wage bills for large companies are presented. For example, the CEO total salary includes incentives, shares and pension payments. The staff wage bills includes pension payments, social charges and suchlike.

Graph 1: Comparison of CEO total remuneration from selected cement companies in 2015. Source: Company annual reports. 

There isn't a great deal to comment here except that compared to the average wage these are high from a rank-and-file worker perspective! The total salary for Eric Olsen, the CEO of LafargeHolcim, is lower than HeidelbergCement and Italcementi, which seems odd given that LafargeHolcim is the bigger company. However, Olsen has only been in-post since mid-2015. By contrast, Bernd Scheifele became the chairman of the managing board of HeidelbergCement in 2005. Carlo Pesenti, CEO of Italcementi and part of the controlling family, took over in 2004. Albert Manifold, CEO of CRH, also sticks out with a relatively (!) low salary given the high revenue of the company.

Graph 2: Comparison of CEO remuneration to average staff cost and total company revenue in 2015. Source: Company annual reports. 

This starts to become more interesting. HeidelbergCement's higher CEO/staff and CEO/revenue ratios might be explained by Scheifele's longer tenure. Yet Italcementi definitely sticks out with a much higher CEO wage compared to both the average staff wage and the company's revenue. Again, CRH stands out with a much lower CEO/staff ratio. Dangote's CEO/staff ratio is low but its CEO/revenue ratio is in line with the other companies' figures.

Consider the figures for China Resources and this suggests that CEO/revenue ratio may be more important than the CEO/staff ratio. The implication being that the market will only tolerate a ratio of up to about 0.05%. Any higher and the CEO's family has to own the company. Which, of course, is the case with Carlo Pesenti and Italcementi. Until HeidelbergCement takes over later in 2016 that is.

That’s as far as this rough little study of CEO remuneration at cement companies will go. So, next time anybody reading this article from a cement company asks for a pay rise, consider how much your CEO is receiving.