【正文】 % .] Chemical revenues of bn USD in Eastern Europe (CEE bn USD, CIS bn USD) are parable in size to Ireland or the Netherlands IND CHN CEE CIS Middle East EU 15 JPN NAFTA Global share [%] 1. 1 2 3 4 5 CEE vs. CIS: Basic structural differences in chemicals – despite of similarly good growth perspectives 2. Very different (market entry) strategies necessary for CEE and CIS !!! 1) Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria 2) Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Geia, Moldova CEE 1) CIS 2) PLAYERS / ACTIVITIES Local / regional players producing valueadded chemicals Big private oil/gas panies producing mainly petrochemicals and modities COMPETI TIVENESS Domestically but not yet globally petitive production / asset footprint Unpetitive production / logistics, but petitive raw materials / feedstock TRADE High imports of high/mediumvalue chemicals, low level of exports High petrochemical exports, high consumer chemicals imports DEGREE OF PRIVATIZATION Stateowned / controlled panies still dominant Privatization of Russian players largely pleted (Renationalization?) ACTIVITIES OF WESTERN COMPANIES Greenfield investments and JVs in consumerdriven segments Demanddriven Greenfield and supplydriven Brownfield investments / JVs Players / activities: Local players producing valueadded chemicals in CEE – CIS strong in raw materials Local/regional players in CEE and strong resourcedriven players in CIS CEE CIS PLAYERS: Weak, big stateowned / controlled players and some strong private local / regional chemical producers – Largest players on various valuechain levels: CIECH, Zaklady Azotowe, Unipetrol, Duslo, Novacke Chemicke Zavody, etc. ACTIVITIES: Valueadded chemical production sites in all parts of CEE – Ethylene: CZ, HU, PL, RO, BG, SL – Polyethylene: HU, PL, CZ, HU – Ammonium nitrate: PL, SK, BG, RO PLAYERS: Strong oil / gas panies and weak SMEs – Large oil / gas panies: Yukos, Lukoil, Surgutneftegas – Some agrochemical panies: Azot, Akron, PhosAgro, Eurockim, Uralkalii ACTIVITIES: Production of lowcost modities (gas, raw material and energybased chemicals) – Dispersed and dislocated production centers remain from Soviet era – Production in CIS dropped 60% in early 1990s – today more or less at 1990 level again – Unfavorable logistics for world markets Competitiveness: CEE assets petitive domestically – CIS assets not, but petitive raw materials ASSETS: Production sites are petitive (technology, scale) – but only on domestic markets – Example (Ammonium nitrate production in Pulawy, Poland): Capacity 700 kt Minimum domestic size 550 kt Minimum global size 1,000 kt LABOR PRODUCTIVITY: Unpetitive vs. EU 15 industry – turnover per employee at 30% of EU 15 level in 2023 – Significant increases: Up from 19% in 1995 ASSETS: Unpetitive production sites, but petitive raw materials – Example: Methanol and derivatives (Natural gas at Middle Eastern costs of 6075 cents / MBTU) – Fully fledged binates and dislocation of process chains – Unpetitive logistics costs LABOR PRODUCTIVITY: Unpetitive vs. EU 15 industry – turnover per employee only at 3% of EU 15 level in 2023 – Stagnating or even decreasing: In 1995 CIS productivity level was 4% of EU 15 CEE slowly catches up with EU 15 efficiency – unsolved problems in CIS CEE CIS Trade: High level of imports in both CEE and CIS – CIS with significant exports of mainly modities HIGH IMPORTS: bn USD – Specialty / fine chemicals polymers – Consumer chemicals LOW EXPORTS: bn USD – Polymers – Petrochemicals DOMESTIC PRODUCTION covers 53% of domestic dem