Cementing dominance: Birla vs Adani, of Chaebols, conglomerates, and National Champions

India's cement industry is heating up faster than a kiln! If one’s tracking the sector, the war-like situation between the existing and emerging cement giants is pretty evident. For the uninitiated, Aditya Birla Group-backed Ultratech Cement and Adani Group have been at loggerheads for increased market share in recent years. And now, JSW Cement also seems to be gearing up to challenge the potential duopoly.

As conglomerates aggressively acquire smaller players to achieve market domination, the cement industry in India right now resembles an eighteenth-century battlefield. The battle has significantly escalated this year, but this trend of acquiring regional cement companies can be traced back to 2018 when Ultratech acquired Binani Cement.

Since then, both Adani Group and Birla Group have been capturing checkposts all over India, one by one. Ultratech acquired Binani Cement to strengthen its base in the western region and this week, India Cement, for the southern states. Adani has also acquired the Hyderabad-based Penna Cement this year, after acquiring majority stakes in Ambuja Cements and ACC in 2022.

But why the obsession with cement?

Why are the Titans clashing for…cement?

India's infrastructure boom is in full swing, and whoever controls the cement supply holds the key to this construction kingdom. Adani Group has been known to follow an acquire & dominate strategy for capturing market segments. Aditya Birla Group, however, has dominated the cement industry in India through Ultratech for a while now.

The answer to the above question may simply lie in establishing the leadership moat for themselves. With even-growing public and private spending on infrastructure, both players want to capture the majority share to dominate the supplies of cement, which is essential for construction.

Where is the sector heading?

While both Adani and Aditya Birla groups have locked horns to acquire CK Birla’s Orient Cement for a while now, a new hurdle threatens their dominance. As per an Economic Times report, Sajjan Jindal-led JSW Cement has now started to evaluate the acquisition of the promoter stake in Orient Cement.

As an emerging front, JSW Cement also aims to reach 50 MT per annum by 2030. However, two other major players, Shree Cement and Dalmia Bharat, already have 53 MTPA and 43 MTPA capacity.


However, with over a dozen acquisitions over the last decade, both Ultratech and Adani Group are by far the largest players in the sector eyeing over 200 MT per annum by 2030.

What about the prices?

Will consumers benefit from this cutthroat competition to industry domination? In the short term at least, yes! While lower prices might sound appealing, it's essential to keep an eye on quality as consolidation in the manufacturing sector is always tricky. We don't want to end up with buildings crumbling like cookies.

And let's not forget about the little guys. This consolidation of power into a few mega-corporations could squeeze out smaller players, reducing competition and potentially leading to higher prices in the long run.

I think I’ve seen this film before….

The current atmosphere of the cement industry feels reminiscent of what happened in the telecom industry in India in 2016 i.e. the infamous tussle of tariffs. As Reliance Industries launched Jio, it disrupted the entire segment and forced other telecom companies to compete on their terms. As a result, the tariffs fell sharply, companies shut and brands merged, but Jio still claims 40% of the market share in India in terms of subscriber count.

Moreover, experts feel that the change in power dynamics in both these industries, cement and telecom, have direct ties to the current government’s industrial policy. Government policies seem to favour companies that have acquired a dominant position in distinct sectors of the economy, which in India’s case are led by two of the richest men in Asia — Gautam Adani and Mukesh Ambani. This strategy of adopting ‘National Champions’ is seemingly inspired by South Korea’s Chaebols and Japan’s Zaibatsu conglomerates that came into existence decades ago.

From corporate drama to k-drama: Chaebols

The term Chaebol might ring a bell if you've watched K-dramas. They are family-owned business conglomerates in South Korea. This business structure originated in the 1960s and got so popular that it made its way into Korean pop culture. While chaebols have fueled the rapid growth of the Korean economy, concerns about their opaque governance and controlling shareholder interests often deter external investors.

Japan’s zaibatsu were also similar financial and industrial conglomerates that were major forces in Japan during World War II. Korea’s Hyundai and Japan’s Mitsubishi are some prime examples of this structure.

Growth of the Goliaths

Viral Acharya, the former Deputy Governor of the RBI, highlights the decade-old trend of the central government achieving economic growth outcomes by working with large conglomerates in part, rather than with state governments. In his conference paper for the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity in March 2023, he demonstrates this pattern with examples from multiple sectors.

“By way of specific examples, the share of the Top 5 groups by sales in Civil Engineering and Construction rose from 31% in 2016 to 42% in 2021, in Telecommunications from 65% to over 84%, and in the Retail trade sector from under 44% to over 65%. Similarly, the share of Top-5 groups by Assets rose sharply by 2021 to 68% in the Manufacturing of Basic Metals, 26% in the Manufacturing of Chemicals, 90% in the Manufacturing of Refined Petroleum and Coke, and 47% in the Manufacturing of Non-metallic Mineral Products (including cement and other building materials),” writes Acharya.

While this strategy of ‘National Champions’ has benefitted the telecom sector, it has its caveats. The acceleration in the growth may lead to an oligopolistic economy, thereby restricting the entry of new players and stifling innovation. Additionally, a multi-dimensional concentration of power poses the threat of crony capitalism.

National champions: checks and challenges

There’s more to this debate. Arvind Subramanian and Josh Felman, in their paper titled ‘India’s Stalled Rise’ note that the collective impact of this strategy could be more adverse in India, more than anywhere else. They explain that the two big conglomerates — Adani Group and Ambani-led Reliance “have interests that extend throughout the economy, in defence production, ports and airports, energy, natural gas, petroleum, digital platforms, telecommunications, entertainment, media, retail, textiles, financial payments, and education.”

Chaebols and Zaibatsu have/had their demerits that range from autocratic decision-making dubbed as ‘imperialistic management’ to the slow inclination of the market towards an oligopolistic structure. However, they weren’t shielded from international competition, nor was this strategy of creating ‘national champions’ shaped using government regulation. They were prevalent in sectors that faced competition internationally, like Hyundai in automobile manufacturing, keeping them in check.

The lack of a similar system of checks and balances in India may lead to deeper implications of this strategy of ‘national champions.’ Viral Acharya further notes that they “grew not just at the expense of the smallest firms, but also of the next largest firms” and empirically established a causal link between market power and markups (broadly, profit).

At a point when India has seen a monumental shift in infrastructure and looks to capture the market share that China could evacuate, the implications of a tilted policy could prove detrimental. While consolidation can improve performance and catalyse growth, we need to be very careful as a country of the direction we will set ourselves in at this crucial juncture.

Also read: