AIRLINK 80.60 Increased By ▲ 1.19 (1.5%)
BOP 5.26 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-1.31%)
CNERGY 4.52 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (3.2%)
DFML 34.50 Increased By ▲ 1.31 (3.95%)
DGKC 78.90 Increased By ▲ 2.03 (2.64%)
FCCL 20.85 Increased By ▲ 0.32 (1.56%)
FFBL 33.78 Increased By ▲ 2.38 (7.58%)
FFL 9.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-1.52%)
GGL 10.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-1.37%)
HBL 117.85 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.07%)
HUBC 137.80 Increased By ▲ 3.70 (2.76%)
HUMNL 7.05 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.71%)
KEL 4.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-1.71%)
KOSM 4.56 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-3.8%)
MLCF 37.80 Increased By ▲ 0.36 (0.96%)
OGDC 137.20 Increased By ▲ 0.50 (0.37%)
PAEL 22.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.35 (-1.51%)
PIAA 26.57 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.08%)
PIBTL 6.76 Decreased By ▼ -0.24 (-3.43%)
PPL 114.30 Increased By ▲ 0.55 (0.48%)
PRL 27.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.19 (-0.69%)
PTC 14.59 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-1.08%)
SEARL 57.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.35%)
SNGP 66.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.75 (-1.11%)
SSGC 11.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.81%)
TELE 9.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.12 (-1.3%)
TPLP 11.46 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.87%)
TRG 70.23 Decreased By ▼ -1.87 (-2.59%)
UNITY 25.20 Increased By ▲ 0.38 (1.53%)
WTL 1.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-5%)
BR100 7,626 Increased By 100.3 (1.33%)
BR30 24,814 Increased By 164.5 (0.67%)
KSE100 72,743 Increased By 771.4 (1.07%)
KSE30 24,034 Increased By 284.8 (1.2%)

Here’s the thing: despite yawningly weak demand that is only becoming weaker every month, the financial success of most cement companies almost entirely hinges on their strong pricing power, and ability to sell just enough cement at desirable prices. This is why in 1HFY24, with dispatches up 10 percent, revenues for 15 listed cement companies combined were up 20 percent. Let’s not forget, that the major thrust in demand during the period came from exports that more than doubled compared to 1HFY23; domestic sales grew only 1 percent. But the resulting revenue and earnings growth was enabled by prices—on average—surging at a much higher pace than costs did.

After years of cement prices trailing between Rs500 and Rs600 (see graph)—what would now appear to be very small weekly movements—since FY21, the price trajectory in the domestic markets has been more pronounced and steadfast; relentlessly moving in one direction—upwards. In Dec-23, the average price of cement sold in various markets reached its peak which crossed Rs1200. In the most recent recorded week, the average cement bag costs Rs1221, lower than the peak of Rs1244 (note: this is an average price for Pakistan; different cities/markets have different rates). Prices have come down over the past four consecutive weeks without fail. The decline itself is not as significant, but the question it raises is. Does this represent the end of the unwavering price ascent?

It could. Demand slowdown certainly seems to indicate it. Take the latest numbers for instance. In 8MFY24, domestic offtake has “visibly stagnated” (read: “Cement: Out of proportion”, March 18, 2024). Total offtake grew 3 percent, where exports were up 73 percent—now pitching in 15 percent to the sales mix—while domestic offtake dropped 4 percent. And FY23 was not a great year either in terms of offtake. In fact, mapping out the average monthly offtake between FY17 and FY24 (for the period 8M), cement offtake in domestic markets in the current year is lower than five out of the seven years under observation. Let’s restate this. In 8MFY24, the average monthly local offtake stands at roughly 3.26 million tons, lower than last year’s 3.4 million tons and only higher than FY17 and FY19 whose averages stood at 2.85 million tons and 3.16 million tons respectively. But wait. What about capacities?

Between FY17 and FY24, the industry capacity to manufacture cement has increased by 72 percent. Despite an impressive export performance, current capacity utilization is around 55 percent, leaving a major portion of installed capacity lying idle. Demand is simply not there and a host of reasons including persistently high interest rates, still uncontrollable inflation, rising taxes, and ballooning expenses leading to reduced spending power are all depressing demand. New government spending on infrastructure and development projects underway may spur demand once again, but until that happens, there aren’t many new avenues of demand opening up.

Over the past year though, there have been many instances where price wars could have occurred due to sliding capacity utilization and weak demand, but it looked like there wasn’t enough incentive for that to happen substantially. Or perhaps, a stronger alliance was forged between companies than ever before. One could only say that definitively after reviewing company-level data. More on that later.

Comments

200 characters
Az_Iz Mar 27, 2024 05:50pm
Capacity expansion took place when demand crashed and energy costs went high.They increased prices and exports,and came out winners.Wish APTMA,stops asking for subsidies & learns from Cement companies
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
Az_Iz Mar 27, 2024 05:52pm
APTMA should learn from cement industry and quit crying about RCEP.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply
Az_Iz Mar 27, 2024 05:56pm
APTMA, please learn from cement industry,not just how to survive in adverse situation but excel. You got cheap loans under TERF, and you want more subsidies like RCEP.
thumb_up Recommended (0) reply Reply