CARIBBEAN CEMENT Company's dominance of the domestic cement market continues to irk importer Mainland International, whose attorney yesterday used a forum of contractors to again complain about the producer's tactics in the fight for market share.
Attorney-at-law Roderick Gordon, who seemed to be pitching his presentation on the cement industry more to the cement maker, rather than his audience of contractors in attendance at the Incorporated Masterbuilders Association of Jamaica (IMAJ) luncheon, insisted that the market was sufficiently "robust" for the various players to benefit.
Citing Carib Cement's production and sales figures over a four-year period, the company's local cement sales grew from more than 601,000 tonnes in 1999 to 620,000 in 2002, Gordon said: "This shows that the cement market has been growing over the period."
He later told Wednesday Business that they estimate the industry will grow at least 10 per cent per annum.
Carib Cement over the four years moved production from 501,000 in 1999 to 614,000 tonnes in 2002, which it augmented with a total 224,000 tonnes of cement imports over the period. The company claims a 88 per cent control of the market in 2002, up one percentage point over the prior year.
Mainland during the same period imported 10,900 tonnes in 1999, some 74,000 the year following, and 39,300 tonnes in February 2001. Last year, they imported 120,000 tonnes, vice-president of operations, Jody Myrie, told Wednesday Business, adding that the company sold all supplies it brought into the island.
PROTECTIONISM IN PLACE
Gordon, in reference to Carib Cement's complaints before the Anti-Dumping Commission against Mainland, said the issue had been "more about protection of market share, rather than market share itself."
A visitor at the IMAJ luncheon, who identified himself only as someone with "interest in the cement industry", loudly challenged Gordon, insisting that he explain how cement already defined as being dumped in Trinidad ended up in Mainland's possession and on the Jamaican market when the company first began importing the commodity.
"By vessel," was Gordon's acerbic response.
Myrie, commenting on the allegations, said the charges of dumping against Mainland were not made at the time of those imports. Earlier, another cement importer, ARC Systems, in response to the query, said dumping in one market does not necessarily translate to dumping in another, and that it is left to each country to decide.
The Commission had ruled in favour of Carib Cement in the two cases it brought against its competitor, decisions that continue to irk Mainland.
DEFENDING ITS STANCE
"The Anti-Dumping Commission found a margin of dumping. This is not to say that Carib Cement should not pursue remedies, but what Mainland as a new entrant is saying is we don't see the material injury," Gordon told the IMAJ luncheon.
The Commission, he added, found no material injury, but ruled that there was "a threat" of injury because of the size of the markets Thailand and Indonesia from which Mainland's cement supplies had originated.
The attorney, who is versed in international trade, labelled "the fight" between the two cement sellers as a costly distraction, with both companies wracking up heavy legal costs, including the lawyers that both sides brought in from the United States to help argue the case.
Myrie said the rulings against Mainland the penalty being added import duties on the dumped cement called for the duties to be imposed on new shipments, and that the company incurred no financial liability as a result, having moved away from those suppliers.
