Displaying items by tag: Competition

Australia: Barro Group, the family-owned supplier of premixed concrete, quarry machinery and associated products, has attracted the scrutiny of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) over its 43% stake in Adelaide Brighton due to the possible overlap in the two companies’ roles as suppliers of cement, concrete and aggregates. The Advertiser reported that Adelaide Brighton chairman Raymond Barro defended the pairing, saying the companies had ‘complementary footprints’ with ‘limited crossover of products and locations in which for Adelaide Brighton and Barrow Group to compete.’

Romania: The national competition authority stated yesterday that it will investigate LafargeHolcim’s deal with Oresa for the latter’s takeover of the precast concrete producer Somaco. LafargeHolcim assumed the asset in July 2019 at an undisclosed price.

Nigeria: Dangote Cement has stated that the rate at which consumers are winning valuable prizes in its on-going national consumer promotion, tagged ‘bag of goodies,' is not a gimmick, but a means of giving back to the loyal consumers of its cement products. The response follows criticism that there are too few winners.

At a prize ceremony in Port Harcourt, Aliko Dangote, Chairman of Dangote Cement, stated that the presentation events were proof that the promotion was not a scam. The company is giving out 43 cars around Nigeria as well as other prizes, including televisions. “We value everybody in our value chain – distributors, wholesalers and retailers – and this is our own way of giving back to our consumers,” said Dangote.

UK: The Global Cement and Concrete Association (GGCA) has launched a photography competition to showcase the role of concrete in the world. The contest has three categories and is open to both professional and amateur photographers. A top price of US$10,000 is on offer for the winning entry.

Malaysia: Suhadi Sulaiman, the chief executive officer (CEO) of CMS Cement, says that the company does not intend to increase its prices ‘anytime soon.’ He said that any potential enquiry into a differene in prices between Peninsular Malaysia and Sarawak would show that the cement producer had not riased its prices since early 2016, according to the Borneo Post newspaper. He made the comments in a reponse to a call by the Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng for such an enquiry.

“We welcome the enquiry for two reasons... Firstly, it will show that the disparity in prices is purely due to the recent aggressive price war, which led to industry mergers and acquisitions in Peninsular Malaysia,” said Suhadi. “Secondly, an enquiry of this nature will also serve to show once and for all that Sarawak is not, and never has been, a cement monopoly.”

Lim said previously that an investigation was necessary to determine whether cartel-like behaviour was responsible for higher cement prices in Sarawak. He noted that the price was ‘significantly’ higher in the state than in Peninsular Malaysia.

Peru: The Supreme Court has upheld a fine of nearly US$2m by the National Institute for the Defense of Free Competition and the Protection of Intellectual Property (INDECOPI) on UNACEM. The penalty was levied due to UNACEM and its distribution network refusing to allow retailers to sell cement made by its competitor, according to the Gestión newspaper. INDECOPI said that in 2014 UNACEM and its collaborators refused to allow retailers to stock its Sol brand of cement if they were selling the rival Quisqueya brand produced by Mexico’s Cemex.

El Salvador: The Board of Directors of the Superintendence of Competition (CDSC) has fined Holcim El Salvador US$82,000 for failing to provide data for an investigation. The CDSC started its investigation in mid-2018, according to Summa magazine. However, the subsidiary of LafargeHolcim has been accused of delaying submitting information to the competition data in the autumn of 2018.

Philippines: The Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) says it will consider a new tariff on imported cement as part of its investigation into alleged anti-competitive behaviour. In early January 2019 The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) said it would impose a provisional safeguard duty of US$0.16/bag on imported cement, according to the Philippine Star newspaper. The PCC started its latest investigation into the cement industry in 2017. Previously it said it planned to complete the study in 2019.

Belgium: The European Commission has approved the acquisition of sole control over Cimpor Portugal by Turkey’s Oyak. The commission ruled that there are no competition concerns between the cement producers given that they operate in different geographic markets. The deal was announced in late October 2018.

The European Commission’s decision to investigate Duna-Dráva Cement’s (DDC) purchase of Cemex Croatia sticks out in a busy news week. There have been a few noteworthy news stories this week from the Indonesian government making preparations to fight overcapacity, LafargeHolcim retreating from Chile, Cemex restructuring its management in Colombia after investigations into a land deal and the announcement of merger plans between two of the larger refractory manufacturers. Yet the commission’s probe is a response to what may be in effect a ‘land grab’ by DDC. How on earth did HeidelbergCement and Schwenk, the joint-owners of DDC, think they were going to pass this one past the relevant competition bodies?!

As the commissions describes it, the “proposed transaction would combine Cemex Croatia, the largest producer in the area, and DDC, the largest importer.” So far, so bad. Then add the observation that Cemex Croatia and LafargeHolcim control all the cement terminals in ports along the Croatian coast. Cemex has three cement plants in the south of the country with no nearby competition. Giving the owners of DDC those assets ties up the market southern Croatia nicely. Understandably, the European Commission has concerns.

Croatia has five cement plants. LafargeHolcim runs a 0.45Mt/yr plant at Koromačno and Nasicecement run a 0.6Mt/yr plant at Nasice. Cemex’s three plants are all in the south near Split within about 10km of each other. When Global Cement visited in late 2014 Cemex Croatia told us that the plants were so close together that the company considered them as one plant. The sites also share one quarry for their raw materials. Only one of three plants, Sv Juraj the largest, has a bagging unit and Sv 10 Kolovoz was mothballed due to poor market demand. Together the plants have a cement production capacity of 1.92Mt/yr. This gives Cemex 65% of the market by production capacity.

Describing the three plants as one certainly makes sense for a company that might have been considering selling them. However, it is a fair comment given the close proximity of the plants to each other and the joint-capacity below that of some of the larger single site multi-kiln plants around the world. In this sense, the real questions for the European Commission will be how much of a dent to competition will it make to hand over the area’s main importer to the area’s main producer?

Graph 1: Cement consumption in Croatia, 2011 - 2015 (Mt). Source: Croatian Bureau of Statistics.

Looking at the national cement market since 2011 in Graph 1 using data from the Croatian Bureau of Statistics, sales volumes fell to a low in 2013 and have picked up since then, although not to the same levels. Prior to this cement sales halved from 2008 to 2013. Under these kinds of conditions Nexe Grupa, the owner of Nasicecement, filed with pre-bankruptcy settlements in 2013. HeidelbergCement expressed interest in the cement assets around this time, although nothing eventually happened. Imports of cement grew by 11% year-on-year to 312,000t in 2015 from 280,000t in 2014. This compares to a 1% increase to 2.36Mt in domestic cement sales in 2015.

As the commission suggests, combining the region’s biggest producer and its biggest importer seems like a recipe for reduced competition and inflated prices. This could be mitigated, in theory, if DDC decided to flood the region with imports from HeidelbergCement’s new assets from Italcementi once it completes its purchase of that company. Although a dominant player in a region undercutting its own prices seems far fetched. Theoreticals aside, it seems very unlikely that the European Commission will let the purchase go ahead without taking some sort of action.