The trend of complication of Russian beer market is going on and in several directions at the same time. The range has got wider, the import and small segments are growing, namely craft beer, alcohol-free beer and special flavor beer. At the same time, all ex-mega brands and light lagers by Russian brewers are experiencing a decline of their shares. AB InBev Efes, Heineken, MBC and Pivzavod Trekhsosenskiy have exceeded the market, Carlsberg was developing slower than the market and Ochakovo as well as some other mid-sized breweries have been cutting down their volumes. To a big extent brewers’ performance was connected to their ability to reach agreement with networks, sacrifice their margin and enter new markets. Craft brewers are facing a serious danger of producers’ registration introduction – de facto licensing. ...
The global outlooks of the legal market of cannabis are excellent. It is possible to simultaneously imagine dry law repeal and craft brewing boom but not in one but in several consumer categories. For alcohol is contained in liquids and cannabis derivatives can be in three physical forms.The value of legal market of cannabis and its products can reach 10% of the world beer market in five years, and in 2030-2040 even reach the same scope provided the current rates of legalization and development of market infrastructure remain at the same level. Cannabinoids are actively integrating into the food industry from chewing gum to beverages deforming the pharmaceutical and alcohol markets, they influence the trends of healthy lifestyle and beauty. ...
Beer market of Kazakhstan acquired both traits of East European countries and South Eastern Asia taking a transitional position between them by many criteria and consumption style. Yet there is a positive trend in beer production which differs Kazakhstan from most of the neighboring countries. The market has remained consolidated in the hands of two international players because of its small size. However, it faces dynamic processes such as fast growth of draft beer sales, up and downs of regional companies and Carlsberg Group’s ultimate expansion. Excessive mainstream segment has declined over the recent years, yet, Zhigulevskoe and national brands with regional links have yielded their positions to a range of new products. In our review special attention was paid to regional analysis of the markets. In 14 regions of Kazakhstan we compared the companies’ positions, the market price segmentation and DIOT channel development. Besides we have compared the beer market of Kazakhstan to neighboring countries. ...
Ambev vs. Anheuser-Busch: A Primer on Retained Earnings
If I make a dollar on every widget I sell, ideally I take that dollar and reinvest it in new capacity, enter new markets or stoke demand for my products in existing markets. What I don’t want is to spend that dollar on replacing plants and equipment, paying off piles of debt or defending myself against lawsuits because my widget causes measles. There’s a case often made that debt repayment can drive profitability when your cost of capital is greater than your return on equity, but this isn’t the kind of dynamic I’m interested in as a long-term investor in a business. It’s instructive here to crunch some numbers to determine which of our companies is the better capital allocator.
Between 2002 and 2010, Ambev earned a grand total of 9.96 Brazilian Reals per share (approx. $6.40USD at current rates). During that same time the company paid out 7.10 Reals ($4.56USD) in dividends. This leaves 2.86 in retained earnings, which were plowed back into the business. Earnings per share were .66 in 2002 and 2.44 in 2010 with the incremental profit equaling 1.78 (2.44 - .66). Utilizing only 2.86 in retained earnings, the company realized a 62% return (1.78 / 2.86). This is a company firing on all cylinders and driving shareholder value at every turn. Now for Papa BUD.
Over the same period, Anheuser-Busch InBev earned $21.99 per share. The company paid out one .39 dividend in 2010 leaving 21.60 in cumulative retained earnings to reinvest. Earnings per share were $1.12 in 2002 and $2.50 in 2010 with the incremental profit equaling 1.38 (2.50 – 1.12). Utilizing 21.60 in retained earnings, the company was only able to realize a 6.4% return (1.38 / 21.60).
Whatever the company is doing with its earnings (a discussion for another time), they are not delivering the incremental profit and this is what the smart investor demands.
28 Июл. 2011