Beer market of Russia 2018
- General market picture
- Foreign trade setting records
- Demography as challenge to branding
- Aged consumer
- Declining of youth brands
- Nostalgia on trend
- DIOT feels at home
- 5.0 Original is the new face of import
- Positions of Market Leaders
- Carlsberg Group
- AB InBev Efes
- AB InBev
Ukrainian beer market 2018
- Better than yesterday
- Performance by value
- Positions of Ukrainian brewers
The beer market dynamics in Russia is approaching zero, yet major brewers are divided into those who developed considerably in 2017 and those who considerably reduced their volumes. For instance, company Efes has managed to substantially extend their sales due to restrained pricing policy and activity in the modern trade. Heineken has also demonstrated an excellent performance promoted by significant increase of advertisement budgets launching a non-alcohol sort of the title brand and unusual activity in the economy market segment. Carlsberg and AB InBev have been focusing on margins and lost a market share of their inexpensive brands. Serious dependence on PET package and mass enthusiasm about Zhigulevskoe have negatively impacted the most of big regional brewers, that have been for the first time pressed by the leaders in the key sales channels, especially in Volga and Central regions. In the small business there has been a noticeable slowdown in appearing of new restaurant breweries, yet the number of craft breweries has been growing rapidly. In 2018, the beer market is likely to grow a little, while the share of AB InBev Efes may decrease due to the integration. ...
“Catalogue of Russian Beer Producers 2018” includes 1070 businesses ranging from large subsidiaries of international companies to rather small restaurant and craft microbreweries.The catalogue includes 32 large breweries, 75 regional breweries, 693 industrial mini- and microbreweries as well as 270 restaurant breweries. ...
India. Lenders insist on listing of Vijay Mallya’s overseas assets
In their reply to the affidavit submitted by the embattled businessman to the Supreme Court last week, the banks urged the court to “take a serious view” of Mallya’s defiance of its order and said that his non-disclosure of assets “do not enable it (the consortium) to assess his ability to repay” or arrive at “considered view for acceptance or otherwise of any negotiated settlement offer”.
Vijay Mallya’s refusal to disclose overseas assets indicated his lack of bona fides and is an express attempt to obfuscate facts and suppress vital information, the lenders said.
Regarding Mallya’s willingness to deposit a total of `2,920 crore — including net sale proceeds of his 32.29% stake in United Breweries Holdings and `1,329 crore lying with the Karnataka High Court — the consortium said that the transfer of `660 crore, the sales proceeds from the sale of UBHL equity shares of United Spirits — is misleading as several other creditors have also laid their claims on these proceeds. They, however, raised no objection to the transfer of `243 crore, the sales proceeds from the sale of Kingfisher Finvest (India)’s shares of USL.
The lenders claimed that they had no knowledge of the `1,329 crore lying with the Karnataka HC, including `379 crore as FDs with Laxmi Vilas Bank.
According to the consortium, the liquor baron’s stand that he and his family are not obliged to disclose overseas assets is false as he in his statement of assets during restructuring of loans furnished to banks on April 9, 2009, had included overseas assets worth `796 crore and his obligation as a guarantor is subsisting and the banks have a right to proceed against Mallya’s assets “anywhere in the world”.
Also, the banks pointed out, no information was given by the UB chairman about $40 million, a part of $75-million payout package signed with London-based Diageo. This amount, according to the bankers, ought to be considered as one of his assets for recovery purposes.
The banks also alleged that revocation/suspension of passport by the ministry of external affairs is being used “as a ruse to avoid participation” in the proceedings before the Supreme Court and the same deserves to be deprecated. Mallya left India for the UK on March 2.
According to the bankers’ affidavit, suspension of his passport allows Mallya to approach the Indian High Commission in London for issuance of an emergency certificate which leaves enough room for him to indicate the probable date of appearance before Supreme Court. Now even after revocation of passport, he can still return to India by approaching the High Commission, the banks said in response to Mallya’s stand that suspension of his passport and issuance of non-bailable warrants against him have created impediments in the whole process of settlement of loans.
On the liquor baron’s claim that defunct KAL, whose liabilities amounted to `15,731 crore, was a commercial failure and global meltdown made things worse for it, the consortium said that such defence is not “valid in the eyes of law”. The group of 17 banks is seeking dues of over `9,000 crore from Mallya for loans made to KAL, which stopped flying in 2012.
26 Апр. 2016