Document YGx2yMdw8Z3k0djODvY2RgzrO
STRATEGIC PLANNING - ASBESTOS BUSINESS RECORD OF INITIAL MEETINGS HELD ON MAY Z, 3, 4, 1979
UCC 003833
Industry Definition Calidria asbestos is sold in the U.S. , Japanese and European markets.
In some applications it competes with other asbestos products and in other applications it competes with other asbestos and non-asbestos products. This generalization forms the basis for the following industry definition:
Those enterprises engaged in the worldwide production of short fiber asbestos and/or viscosity control agents.
Business Definition The mining, milling, chemical treatment and worldwide marketing
of high quality short fiber asbestos.
Industry Categorization 1. The market in which UCC high quality short fiber asbestos
competes with other short fiber asbestos. The competitive sources are: (a) California asbestos, similar to UCC asbestos, and produced by Atlas; and (b) Canadian short fiber asbestos produced in the recovery of long fiber asbestos. The Canadian industry regards short fiber as a by-product and not all of it is currently recovered.
2. The market in which UCC high quality short fiber asbestos competes with other short fiber asbestos and non-asbestos products as viscosity control agents.
1-
UCC 003834
INDUSTRY PROFILE
TIME FRAME: 10 YEARS
INDUSTRY ASSESSMENT
CRITICAL
ITEM
X J 1. VOLUME GROWTH
2. POTENTIAL FOR UNFORECAST VOL. GROWTH DECLINE
X J 3. VULNERABILITY TO SUBSTITUTION/OBSOLESCENCE
PROSPECTS FOR VOLUME GROWTH EARNINGS QUALITY
HIGH
MODERATE
LOW
X
4
X
4
X X
4
4
X 4 4. COMPETITOR: NO.
1
: DIVERSITY]
yx
J 5. PRICING RESPONSE TO OVERCAPACITY
/X
6. INDUSTRY OR MARKET INDUCED CYCLICALITY 7. PRODUCT LINE BREADTH
v'X
4 -X
J8. A. SHARE DISTRIBUTION] B. SHARE STABILITY
Vx
9. RATE OF CHANGE OF TECHNOLOGY X 10. BASIS OF PRODUCT COMPETITION
X4 X4
X 4 11. CUSTOMER: NO 71
: MIXJ
vx
12. RESOURCE AVAILABILITY
4*
V' 13. GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION
X4
14. BARRIERS TO ENTRY
4X
__ _ ____...........................................................................................................t - -i -_________ ____________- __________________ _______ _________ __ _________ ____________ ............... ........ _______________ J. ____ ______,,
________
________
________
UCC 003835
Industry Profile The time frame for the industry evaluation was set at 10 years on
the basis that three to five years will elapse before the health problem is fully developed and thereafter enough time will be required to consider an expansion and its consequences.
Item 1,
Volume growth in the asbestos (/) applications is estimated at
3% per year over the evaluation time frame, while the growth rate of non
asbestos (X) applications is estimated at 8-10% per year.
Item 2.
The potential for unforecasted growth or decline is considered in
the context that health and government regulations are considered in special
items. On this basis the other prospects for unforecasted growth or decline
in either category is not considered high.
Item 3.
Vulnerability to Substitution. Much effort has been expended to
develop a substitute for asbestos in both categories, but asbestos is still
preferred.
Item 4.
Competition mix and number. The competitors are:
Asbestos Category Cary, Canadian 1ohns -Manville Atlas (California) Bell
Non-Asbestos Category National Lead Cab ot De Gussa Baker Caster Oil "Wacker (Europe)
-2-
UCC 003836
A favorable rating is based on few competitors who exhibit discipline in the marketplace and in some cases the geographic locations impose freight charges which are limiting. Also, UCC short fiber is of higher quality than other short fiber asbestos products.
Item 5.
Pricing response to over capacity. In both categories, producers
reduce capacity in periods of low demands.
Item 6.
Cyclicality. Moderate cyclicality is reduced by construction
industry cycles. A consistent strike pattern in Canadian operations has
worked in UCC's favor. When the market expands production increases to
accommodate the expansion.
Item 7.
Product Line Breadth. In the asbestos category there is only
one product -- short fiber asbestos and UCC enjoys a quality edge. In the
non-asbestos category UCC short fiber competes with silica and organic
treated products.
Item 8.
Market Distribution /Share Stability. The market distribution in
the asbestos category is:
U.S7A.
Tons
% Total
JAPAN Tons % Share
TOTAL Tons % Share
UCC J ohns -Manville Cary Atlas
Total
24,600 33,000 46,000 27,400 131, 000
19 25 35
21 100
7,400 15,000 22,600
0 45,000
15 35 50 0 100
32,000 48,000 68,600 27,400 176, 000
18 27
39 16 100
-3UCC 003837
In the non-asbestos category market distribution is:
U. S. A.
Market Share, %
Japan
Europe
Total
UCC DeGussa Cabot National Lead Baker
15 25 19 15 25 70 70 40 45 2 5 40 10 2 3 3
5 132
In both categories the industries are mature and market share is stable.
Item 9.
Rate of Technology Change. The level of technical effort in
the asbestos category is low. Any increase in effort is likely to be to improve
the quality of competitive product and hence unfavorable. The level of
technical effort in the non-asbestos category is higher and asbestos is still
used.
'
Item 10. Basis of Competition. Pricing is the downward factor. Asbestos offers some advantages. This is a minor factor in the asbestos category and more important in the non-asbestos category.
Item 11. Customer mix and number is considered favorable. (See item 4. )
Item 12. Recourse Availability. Short fiber asbestos is plentiful. Competitive products in the non-asbestos category are plentiful.
Item 13. Government Intervention. Generally, asbestos is receiving much unfavorable attention and government regulation of its use is a negative factor in a customer consideration, somewhat less so in the non-asbestos
>
category than in the asbestos category.
-4- UCC 003838
Item 14. Barriers to Entry. Considered high because of asbestos regulation and some uncertainty regarding the future. In the non-asbestos category the technical competence and high capital investment for competitive products are barriers.
Item 15. Customer Value Added Component. Rated low in the asbestos category and moderate in the non-asbestos category.
Item 16. Not applicable.
Item 17. Government Mandated Declines. In view of all the attention focused on the health factor concerning asbestos, the possibility of government action must be recognized. The pressure is more likely to be in the asbestos rather than the non-asbestos category because in the latter category asbestos is handled well and is well encapsulated in the final product.
Item 18. Activist Influence. The influence of activists in a highly visible controversy cannot be discounted and it will be unfavorable. Their attention will be directed toward the asbestos rather than the non-asbestos category.
Item 19. Third Party Liability. UCC was not involved in the type of asbestos applications now subject to heavy third party liability action. UCC has been named in a number of actions but so far has been excused once non-participation is recognized. All of this ^activity relates to the asbestos category.
-5- UCC 003839
tJCC PRESENT COMPETITIVE POSITION PROFILE
UCC 003840
UCC Competitive Position Profile Items I, I A. Market Share and Market Change (principally U. S. A. ). Rated strong in the asbestos category because of a quality product. Fair in the non-asbestos because competition products do not have a strong health factor as does asbestos.
Item 2.
Price Leadership. UCC is independent in the asbestos category
and can exercize leadership. In the non-asbestos category UCC must offer
a price advantage to the customer to offset the health factor.
Item 3.
Not applicable.
Item 4.
Product Line Breadth. In both categories offers products to
serve a diverse number of applications and customers.
Item 5.
Not applicable.
Item 6.
Breadth of Customer Base. In the asbestos category, UCC
serves many customers for many uses but Johns-Manville has the same
capability. In the non-asbestos category, UCC matches every use of
competitive products plus some that competitive products cannot serve.
Item 7.
Total Cost Position. Leading in the non-asbestos category
because UCC has position in ore and good costs, whereas competitors
purchase intermediate and are, in effect, converters. In the asbestos
category, UCC's position is fair because competitive short fiber asbestos
is regarded as a by-product.
-6UCC 003841
Item 8. Special Business Relationship. Rated strong in the non asbestos category because W. R. Grace is a good agent with access to many markets. Rated weak in the asbestos area because UCC has no special business relationship.
Item 11. Technology Position. Rated very strong in both categories. UCC business was developed through strong technical position and is maintained by good technical service.
Item 12. Management Risk Taking, Rated strong in the non-asbestos category because the chemical treatment facility was expanded to meet a growing market. Rated fair in the asbestos category because the plant has not been expanded to meet peak demand.
Item 13. Management Responsiveness to External Environment. Rated strong in both categories on the basis of response to the health factors and liability.
Item 14. Resource Sufficiency. Rated leading/strong in the non asbestos category because of ore position whereas competitors are dependent upon other suppliers. Rated strong in the asbestos category because the ore deposit is large and low cost. Competitors have similar positions.
Item 15. Product Quality. Rated leading in both categories because of technical approach to product quality.
-7UCC 003842
Item 16. Customer Service/Reliable Supplier. Rated leading in both categories. The asbestos business has been built on technology and customer service. Item 17. Health Factor. While the health factor is a serious issue in the asbestos category, it is not a competitive factor since all suppliers would be affected by any adverse development. In the non asbestos category the possibility of asbestos being discontinued in favor of non-asbestos products cannot be dismissed.
-8UCC 003843
Key Competitive Factors
Asbestos Cat egory
Market Share
X
Product Line Breadth
X
Breadth of Customer Base
X
Total Cost Position
X
Technology Position
X
Product Quality
X
Customer Service/Dependable Suppliers
X
Health Factor
Non-Asbestos Category
X X X X X
X
-9 UCC 003844
Assessment of Principal Competitors Relative to Key Competitive Factors
Asbestos Category
UCC
Carey
Market Share Product Line Breadth Breadth Customer Base
Strong Strong Strong
Strong
Strong/ Fair
Str ong
Total Cost Position Technical Position Product Quality Customer Service/Dependable
Supplier Overall Rank
Fair Leading/
Strong
Leading
Leading
Leading/ Strong 1
Strong
Weak Strong/
Fair Weak
Strong/ Fair 3
J ohns - Manville Strong Strong Strong
Leading/ Strong Strong Fair Strong
Strong 2
Atlas Strong Weak Weak Fair Weak Strong Weak
Fair/ Weak 4
Non>Asbestos Category
Product Line Breadth Breadth of Customer Base Total Cost Position Technical Position Product Quality Health Factor Overall Rank
UCC Strong Leading
Natl. Lead
Fair/ Weak
Fair
Leading
Leading/ Strong
Leading
Strong Strong Strong
Weak
Strong/^) Fair
Strong
Strong/ Fair
Cabot DeGussa
Fair
Fair
Strong Strong
Strong Strong
Strong Strong
Strong Strong
Strong Strong
Strong
Strong/ Fair
Baker Fair/
Weak Fair
Strong
Fair
Strong
Strong Strong/
Fair
22
12
2
(^The health factor was weighted at 4 to 1 against other factors in the overall rating for UCC.
-10UCC 003845
PROSPECTS FOR LONG-1 ERM INDUSTRY GROWTH AND EARNINGS Q UALITY
NON-ASBESTOS CATEGORY
>* a* O O w
<
U co O Hco W pq
<co
LU
>
h
LU it
a. H S OU Oa.
CD Z
U5<i
CD
Zo
GC
&
11 -
-
tr <u.
UCC 003846
<
ui
3
Key External Assumptions
Volume Growth
1. 3% per year for asbestos category 2. 8% per year for non-asbestos category
Government 1. There is no change in depletion allowance. 2. Third party liability due to prior exposure is $during the plan period. 3. Third party liability due to present and future exposure is minimal. 4. There are no widespread laws or mandatory substitutions. 5. The OSHA TLV is no more restrictive than 1. 0 fiber per CC TWA. 6. Other regulations (EPA. MSHA, etc. ) are not substantially more stringent than at present. 7. There is no impact due to "retroactive" legislation.
Competition 1. There is no new major exploitation of the Coalinga deposit. 2. The Russians do not enter the asbestos category market with a short fiber product. 3. That competitors do not reduce the price of their product in the non-asbestos category market. 4. That other short fiber producers do not increase their marketing effort in the asbestos category market.
-12UCC 003847
Customers 1. There is no significant unexpected impact on the asbestos category market due to customer reaction to the health factor. 2. That the apprehension of customers in the non-asbestos category stabilize for 2-3 years, then gradually decline.
Technology 1. Research will not show asbestos to be more hazardous than current thinking, or that "Calidria" asbestos is more hazardous than other short fiber asbestos. 2. There will be no major breakthrough regarding the development of substitutes for short fiber asbestos or improved performance non-asbestos viscosity control agents.
-13UCC 003848
Generic Strategy Development A simplified capacity flow sheet serves to illustrate the capabilities
of the present mill:
Head End Capacity 60, 000 Tpy
t
Chemical Treatment Circuit Capacity
1,800 Tpy
Short Fiber Circuit Capacity
33,000 Tpy
Currently, the product sold in the non-asbestos category consists of approximately 1,400 Tpy which is processed through the chemical treat ment circuit plus approximately 900 Tpy of product which is processed through the short fiber circuit. At the present time the chemical treatment circuit has about 400 Tpy excess capacity and the short fiber circuit nearly at capacity.
In considering generic strategy development, it was recognized that asbestos will be subject to intense scrutiny from a health viewpoint over the next 3 to 5 years. It is anticipated that early in this period the present atmosphere will give way and an objective analysis will determine the use of asbestos in the future.
14UCC 003849
The recommended generic strategies are:
1. Hesitation. This is regarded as a base case in which sales in both the asbestos and non-asbestos categories expand at the projected growth rates to the level of present plant capacities. Thereafter, the business would operate at capacity and product mix in both categories would be optimized.
2. Market Penetration - A. There appears to be an opportunity to increase sales in the asbestos category dramatically. In order to take advantage of the opportunity the capacity of the short fiber circuit must be increased by about 25,000 tpy at an estimated cost of $0 million. Increased technical support would be required to serve the enlarged market. It is probable that price reductions would be required to achieve the objective. The expansion would be started as soon as possible (obviously before the health issue is resolved) and be available for operation on January 1, 1981. Sales of product in the non-asbestos category would grow to the capacity limitation as in the hesitation case.
3. Market Penetration - B. The capacity of the chemical treatment circuit would be increased to 3,600 tpy to accommodate a market which is growing at 8% per year. Present capacity will be limiting at the end of 1982 and therefore production from the expanded circuit should be available in January 1, 1983. The short fiber circuit is currently at capacity and in balance with sales. Therefore sales of
"l5'UCC 003850
short fiber circuit product to the asbestos category business would decrease each year by the amount that this product is diverted to the more profitable non-asbestos category market. Abandonment. The rationale for this strategy is that the health issue will be overwhelming and have a serious adverse effect on Union Carbide's image. In such an environment the return to UCC may not be enough to justify the effort and the risk. There are parties who may be interested in purchasing the assets of a high quality business with unique technology and an excellent ore reserve.
-16UCC 003851