Towering costs of cement – Don’t blame industry!

The Competition Commission has imposed a hefty penalty of Rs.63 billion  on 11 cement companies and the industry association for indulging in alleged cartelisation.  Although the penalty for alleged cartelisation is being appealed in a higher tribunal, the stated objective to control pricing without taking into consideration costs and slowing demand is bound to cause more harm. Sample this:

==================================================================================

The cost of making cement in India has jumped by half over the last four years, and the rising prices of raw materials, energy and freight all indicate that manufacturers have a tough job on their hands to keep their plants ticking.

Ironically, almost all the costs related to the production of cement and its transportation are the monopoly of the government, leaving companies with no elbow room to control these factors. Adding to the problems, the growth in demand for cement has lost momentum due to the sharp slowdown in economic expansion, analysts say.

Cement is a bulk commodity and it needs to be shipped across vast distances to reach the consumer. Freight makes up a little more than a fifth of the total cost of cement. It has climbed more than a quarter on a compounded annual growth rate over the past seven years. This includes transportation costs of clinker, but excludes freight on raw materials which is usually added to the cost of raw materials.

So, the 30 per cent hike in freight rates in the March railway budget meant a stiff increase in costs. To move a 50 kg bag of cement from Andhra Pradesh, a key producing state, to Maharashtra the new rail freight rates added Rs.15 to each bag; to Kerala Rs.22 and as much as Rs.30 to the north east.

Because the railways are state-owned and freight rates set by the government are not negotiable, cement producers have been using the improving highway network to move cement via road. About 35 per cent of cement produced in India is today carried by the railways, down from more than 60 per cent until a decade ago.

The railways are expected to ship at least 30 per cent of the cement in the years to come, given its predominance over longer distances. The economic size of a cement plant has risen to 5 million tonnes a year from 1 million tonnes, meaning larger long haul costs to get the stuff to the ultimate buyer.

It’s only a matter of time before the government raises diesel prices. This would have the potential to balloon transportation costs further. Again, this is out of bounds of cement producers.

The two other major costs are energy and raw materials. Stable supplies of power and coal, also mostly controlled by the state, have always been a challenge. In the absence of competition, the coal produced by government-run mines is of poor quality with high ash and low calorific value.

As a result, cement companies also depend on imported coal of high calorific value. However, the rupee’s sharp depreciation and Indonesia’s – a major coal supplier – recent moves to jack up prices and restrict exports pose huge risks to costs.

All these factors have resulted in a sharp rise in the cost of building a new cement plant over the past two years. With prices not keeping pace with the increase in input and other costs,  EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation) have plummeted to $1,000 per tonne from a greenfield cement plant, compared with $1,500 that was initially expected.

India is the world’s second biggest producer of cement after China, with output soaring after the sector was completely decontrolled in 1989. But the emerging scenario is detrimental for the industry and the country.

 

 

 

Competition Commission penalty on cement industry – Not so fine!

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has imposed a fine of more than Rs 6,000 crore on 11 cement makers alleging cartelisation and price fixing from May 2009 to March 2011.

It is a record penalty and is seen as an attempt by the ant-trust regulator to assert itself. But the last word has not been said on the issue, yet. The cement makers can go on appeal to the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT), and even to the Supreme Court.

Legal experts think the CCI is on slippery ground here. Cement companies say the CCI rules require the commission to establish the existence of a cartel only if there is a written agreement among the parties involved. That is not the case here and the commission has based its findings on circumstantial evidence.

Fact is, despite all the arguments about lower utilization at cement plants and higher prices that informants in the case — the Builders Association of India — has brought against the cement companies, it would be tough to prove that cement prices rose because of cartelisation. As the Cement Manufacturers Association (CMA) submitted before the commission, the report is based on surmises and conjecture.

The CCI ruling said its director general has submitted that the cement companies have enough scope to reduce the price of cement but have tried to earn better margins on sales instead of utilizing more capacity. The argument flies in the face of the very system of free market economics. The shareholders of cement companies want the managements to bring them the best possible returns. If cement demand has been going up despite rising prices, that means optimum pricing for the commodity has not been discovered and the managements did the right thing by raising prices further. If the builders thought the prices were too high to make their business unviable, then they would have stopped buying cement, and the prices would have come down naturally. That is how market economics works.

That it never happened possibly points to another interesting aspect — by bringing the case to the CCI, the builders may have been trying to protect the fat margins that they had commanded at the height of the housing boom. As the CMA said, the third-parties from whom information was collected in this case by the CCI are builders and cement dealers, who all have their own vested interests. The CCI’s very enquiry rests on thin ice here.

Another interesting observation made by the CCI was that the common platform of CMA was used for collection and dissemination of the information on prices of different companies. The CMA countered that it never collected prices by brand but only average prices for passing on to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion. Furthermore, it had been asked by the ministry of commerce and industry to collect the data on a monthly basis to calculate the Wholesale Price Index.

It is akin to penalizing an organization for following the orders of a government department. Besides, as the association said, the information is available publicly!

The CMA also said mere price parallelisms cannot be used to infer cartelization and it is bound to occur in cases where a homologous product is sold in the same market.

Overall, despite all the headlines the CCI made, it looks like the findings have not strong legal base and could be thrown out by higher legal institutions. Till then, however, the CCI’s action has introduced an element of uncertainty into the cement industry at a time of weak demand and slowing economy. The action will have the opposite effect to what the CCI intended under the current economic circumstances.

Competition Commission order on cement ‘cartels’ kicks off heated debate

The recent case of Competition Commission of India imposing a whopping Rs 6,000 crore penalty on cement companies and even the Cement Manufacturers’ Association has kicked off a heated debate across the industry.

As is known, CCI’s ruling came in the wake of a complaint filed by Builders Association of India. By bringing the case to the CCI, the builders may have been trying to protect the fat margins that they had commanded at the height of the housing boom.

As the CMA said, the third-parties from whom information was collected in this case by the CCI are builders and cement dealers, who all have their own vested interests. The CCI’s very enquiry rests on thin ice here.

Cement Factory_Representative Pic

Another interesting observation made by the CCI was that the common platform of CMA was used for collection and dissemination of the information on prices of different companies. The CMA countered that it never collected prices by brand but only average prices for passing on to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion.

Furthermore, it had been asked by the ministry of commerce and industry to collect the data on a monthly basis to calculate the Wholesale Price Index.

It is akin to penalizing an organization for following the orders of a government department. Besides, as the association said, the information is available publicly!

The CMA also said mere price parallelisms cannot be used to infer cartelization and it is bound to occur in cases where a homologous product is sold in the same market.

Overall, despite all the headlines the CCI made, it looks like the findings have not strong legal base and could be thrown out by higher legal institutions. Till then, however, the CCI’s action has introduced an element of uncertainty into the cement industry at a time of weak demand and slowing economy. The action will have the opposite effect to what the CCI intended under the current economic circumstances.