Thank you, everyone. Without much delay, I will transfer the call to Mr.

Deepak Balwani, Head of Investor Relations. Mr.

Deepak, over to you.

Thank you, Dharmesh. On behalf of Ambuja Cements, I'm pleased to welcome all the participants to our earnings call for the fourth quarter of FY '26.

Ambuja Cement is the ninth largest building material solutions company globally and part of the diversified Adani portfolio. Before we start, please note that this call may include forward-looking statements based on our current beliefs and expectations.

These are not guarantees of future performance and may involve unforeseen risks and uncertainty. We remain committed to further strengthening our disclosure standards and improving the quality of our capital market communications to the best in the industry.

We are pleased to have with us on the call Mr. Vinod Bahety, Chief Executive Officer, and Mr.

Rohit Soni, Chief Financial Officer. Now I invite Mr.

Bahety to provide his valuable insights on the quarterly performance. Thank you,

Deepak. Thanks, Dharmesh.

Good evening, everyone. FY '26 was a year of resilience for the Indian cement sector marked by industry consolidation and the GST 2.0 reforms on one side, while the adverse and the extended weather conditions, global geopolitical factors, and the various state elections also affected the industry and demand in some or the other way.

Against this backdrop, Ambuja delivered a resilient performance for the year, achieving its highest ever annual sales volume of 73.7 million tons, up 16% Y-o-Y, year-on-year in that manner, and on a normalized basis, the EBITDA of ₹6,539 crores, up 31% at ₹887 per metric ton, which is on a PMT basis up 12%, and the PAT of ₹2,647 crores, up 17%. The company continues to remain debt-free and with highest credit rating.

Annual volumes grew well ahead of the industry. Trade sales volume grew steady at 10%, while the premium cement accounted for 35% of the trade sales during the year, reflecting sustained progress on premiumization.

During the year, company's cement capacity increased to 109 million tons, supported by commissioning of 10.7 million tons of new grinding capacity at various locations like Marwar, Farakka, Sankrail, Sindri, Krishnapatnam, and the additional clinker capacity of 7 million tons at Jodhpur and Bhatapara. During financial year '26, we also made meaningful progress on the portfolio integration.

Successful amalgamation of Sanghi Industries and Penna Cement with Ambuja Cements is now completed, while ACC and Orient Cement is under process. The One Cement platform is a strategic initiative and will help to bring sharper focus on the operational performance, business synergies, and the overall higher degree of compliances.

Therefore this time, the balance sheet of Ambuja consol now has finalized purchase price allocation of Orient and Penna. Till December, it was on a provisional basis.

The numbers you'll find marginally changes in the balance sheet basis the classification of goodwill and the other intangible assets, while in the P&L you will find some changes in terms of amounts for depreciation and the deferred tax accounting treatments. Further, friends, in the notes to the accounts, you will see various tax-related provisional notes with respect to reversals.

Details are there in the published financials. Please also note financial year '25 and financial year '26 are not comparable like-to-like since FY '25 does not have Orient Cement, while Penna was acquired and consolidated from 16th of August '25, that is only 7.5 months for the FY '25 as against 12 months for FY '26, and while Orient is only for 11 months in FY '26 and was not there in FY '25.

Now let's again come back to the business part. My green power share increased almost 32% now in Q4 compared to 26% before.

The newly acquired assets, particularly Sanghi and Penna, they witnessed lower utilization levels. Sanghi still remains at around say for the full year at 57% on cement capacity utilization, while Penna is 46%.

However, last time I mentioned to you that in December quarter we have seen a good improvement, especially for Sanghi. The turnaround initiatives have taken little longer than the expected timelines, and some of these plants, especially of Penna, needed higher than expected time for maintenance capex and overall upkeep of the assets.

On a cost front, we have seen bit of higher cost compared to our own expectations and therefore some disappointments. Primarily, if I have to look at the reasons, higher freight cost due to increase in the overall say lead, primary and secondary both, increase in some of the state like the additional goods tax, especially in Himachal, then in terms of the higher packing cost, which we more so have seen that in the month of March, which has seen some absorptions given the West Asia war, the higher fuel cost on account of a little higher than expected heat consumption what we have and more so for the acquired assets, the higher branding cost now that we have focused more on trade sales starting from the Q4 and while we have also improved our trade sales to 74% compared to in December quarter of '25 it was 68%, which would clearly mean we are focusing on blended cement.

If you also see, my clinker factor has improved from 67% in December quarter to now 65%. This has also one of the cost which is the branding cost and the sales promotion cost have gone up.

Some of the other issues like the raw material costs, which we could have improved in terms of the fly ash, but pending some of the railway infrastructure, which will be completed in coming months, and you will see a good level of improvement on that. Pending that, we have not been able to meet our some of the raw material costs to our desired levels.

Essentially, there is a three to six months delay on some of the efficiency capexes which has happened, and hopefully in coming quarter, we should be gaining momentum to complete and get the benefits of it. Therefore in FY '27, our focus firmly remains on streamlining the operations and margin expansion.

We will continue to focus on trade sales and more so on the premium product sales, which we have a huge leadership. Almost 36% of my trade sales has been premium cement sales for Q4.

We will continue to improve the reliability at Penna and Sanghi and the overall asset utilization. Together they have 19 million tons of capacity, and the target is to increase the utilization by at least 5% to 10% for these assets.

In terms of the cost, while we are cognizant of the overall ongoing global geopolitical situation, and we have already seen cost escalations in Q4, more so in the month of March, almost by ₹25 a bag, closer to let us say ballpark 400 to ₹500 if I have to go on a full-blown basis, cost increase is there in the industry and so it's to our company. We are recalibrating our cost for this financial year.

I have mentioned earlier about our journey to achieve cost of almost ₹4,000 a ton by March '26 exit. Meanwhile, in terms of the full year of '26, we have achieved a figure of ₹4,400 a ton, which is almost 10% higher to our own targets for the reasons which I have mentioned before.

Although in the month of March, we are closer to at ₹4,100 a ton. Since these are fast-moving global situations and dynamisms over the energy costs and other basically expected hikes in the fuel and diesel and all, therefore it will be very difficult to provide any long-term estimates for right now till the time things stabilize over the next two, three quarters.

Therefore, I would say that on strong conviction on certain components of costs, for example, which I have, a is in terms of the overall say raw material cost led by fly ash, and in terms of the green energy cost, for example, which is going to see a substantial improvement further in our overall situation. Therefore, I strongly believe ₹150 to ₹200 savings will come from this components.

On a overall consol volumes, we are expecting it to grow in FY '27 by almost say 8% to around 80 million-odd tons, and we are cognizant of the fact that we will focus on value with trade volumes and premium cement, and therefore we are keeping it little moderate overall say growth in the volumes part. At an industry level, we believe that given the headlines of inflation and weak monsoon, the industry may grow at around say 5% to 5.5%.

We continue to remain committed to our end-state sales volumes targeted, supported by a sharper focus on higher utilization of the existing capacities and while operationalizing the new capacities and stabilizing them. Therefore, with this proposed ongoing additions of 10 million tons of GU, which you are aware of, which I have already shared with you in the investor deck, some of them, for example, Salai Banwa and Warsaliganj, and so and so forth, we are expecting to hit capacity of almost 119 million tons by end of FY '27.

Capacity expansion plans we are recalibrating in line with our approach to take the advantages of the recent railway policies on bulk cement terminals, with additions pursued more gradual in terms of first focusing on optimizing the current capacities in hand. This will also help in terms of a very disciplined allocation of capital and a steadfast commitment to maximizing the returns on the capital employed.

Looking ahead, India's long-term infrastructure story remains fundamentally very strong and secular. However, with the expected inflationary pressure, weak monsoon, and the cement demand is expected to remain little soft.

Against this backdrop, Ambuja remains focused on disciplined execution, strengthening brand penetration, scaling trade sales, driving premium cement sales, and maintaining the cost and capital discipline. Thank you, and I will now hand it back to the moderator.

Friends, also just to inform you that we also have our Whole-Time Director and senior Mr. Karan Adani also on the call.

He has just joined us. I welcome Karan Bhai, and yeah, I just basically, Karan Bhai, did the opening remarks, and we are now on the Q&A.

Over back to the moderator, please.

Yeah. Hi.

Yeah. Thank you for the opportunity.

My first question was on the volume growth front. In this quarter, as per the investor deck, volumes have grown by about 10-odd percent, but if I adjust them to the Orient Cement volumes, they are more like flattish on a Y-o-Y basis.

Here my question is that if you are seeing some pressure on volumes, because for FY '27, we have given a guidance of 80 million tons, which is roughly a growth of 9% to 10% against the backdrop that we are expecting a much softer industry growth of 5%. I'm just wanting to request a overall color on your volumes, please.

Hello? Navin, sorry.

Sorry for the snag. Navin, you're right, absolutely, in terms of the volume, especially for this March quarter, it has been little muted.

Now for the FY '27, when I given you indication of 80 million, which is around closer to say 8%, we have the visibility in terms of, a, stabilizing the acquired assets of Sanghi, Penna, which I told you, b, the ongoing expansions which will get commissioned in the next few months, between let us say now to September we'll see the capacities will get commissioned and we'll also then stabilize them. I have the incremental volume also coming from this capacities, which I mentioned almost around 10 million tons, and of course stabilizing the acquired assets of Penna and Sanghi.

On that basis basically, we are expecting although with a softer demand for the year. Did I answer your question, Navin?

Yeah. Thank you.

My second question then was on the overall capex plan. As mentioned in this presentation, we are recalibrating our entire growth plan.

We have visibility of taking that overall capacity to 119, but I'm just trying to understand by when will we get a color on the next leg of capex? Because the first day when the asset was acquired, the vision was I think double the capacity and take it to 140.

In the interim, we even increased it to 155, and now we're taking a step back. My question was, from a growth point of view, first of all, can we get a color of the big picture or the next longer term plan?

In the same breath, is it that we are more open to pursue a inorganic growth, which helps us catapult to that overall growth target, or we still believe organic is the way to go? That will help.

Thank you.

Navin, our primary focus remains organic in terms of stabilizing our ongoing expansions and also already acquired assets. Therefore, I would say that remains the primary focus.

I think we have a good headroom to improve our overall say market share by improving the capacity utilizations of these plants. Therefore, as I said, we are going to follow quite a disciplined capital allocation, and given the headwinds right now for the industry, it makes sense to push little bit of the capex, but without losing eyesight on the overall say market share and the volume improvement from the existing asset and the ongoing expansions.

To answer your question, I think maybe what I would say that the target plans of FY '28, it could move a year or two, let us say on a safer side I would say that FY '30. As I said, it doesn't really matter.

What matters is how you are able to ramp up the volume from your overall existing asset, and I have substantial good headroom to ramp up over there. Even if I hit 120 million tons by end of '27, it will give me a good leverage of the overall say market opportunity.

Helpful, sir. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Just continuing on the previous question, what is the clinker capacity as of now?

Raashi, as of now we are sitting on 73 million tons of clinker capacity.

You will be adding another 4 million this year?

Yes. At Maratha and at Penna, Marwar, we will be adding up almost 5 million.

Penna, Marwar is 3 million, sorry, 2 million and Maratha is another 2 million. Yeah, 4 million.

Yeah.

Okay. You mentioned earlier on that the 56% utilization was for Sanghi for the year and Penna was 47%, is that correct?

That is true. That is true.

Okay. The next question is on costs.

Now for the full year, the cost is 4,400. For the quarter, what was the average cost?

4,500? For FY '26, 4,500?

Quarter cost, Raashi, we are sitting at almost ₹4,250 for the overall say quarter, and plus some of this increases what we have seen from the overall escalation. I would let us say that a normalized was almost 4,250 and plus another ₹250 which we have seen increases, almost we are at now ₹4,500 a ton for the quarter of March.

Right. You were saying that the industry costs have gone up by anywhere in the range of 400 to 500.

Is it safe to assume that because of the crisis, you will see another 250 ₹200 to ₹250 increase in costs, which will get offset by your fly ash, green energy, etc.? Is that how we should be thinking about it?

Sorry, I missed your question.

You indicated that we're at 4,500 now on cost. You said 150 to 200 is a reduction that you're expecting because of fly ash, green energy, right?

That's 150 to 200. The overall industry cost has gone up by more, right, because of the West Asia crisis?

Is that 150 to 200 already capturing the increase in industry cost or is this 180 150 to 200 decline in your internal costs and then there's an increase in cost because of the war beyond this?

Raashi, as I said, the 4,500, which is for the March quarter, has already taken the hit of existing increases of almost say ₹250. I would say that 4,500 safely I would say is on a peak basis, let us say on a higher basis which we have seen, barring any aberration of plus minus ₹50, but otherwise you will see a journey which will actually start coming down in passing quarters.

Although, for example, with the overall situation, how the overall energy situation emerges, I would not give with conviction, but I strongly believe that, yeah, this is the peak which we have hit and should see a progressive improvement.

If I can just rephrase this, if nothing increases further in terms of global prices, you will see a decline of at least ₹150 to ₹200?

Yes. Absolutely.

Summarized. Absolutely.

Okay. On the pricing, what has happened to offset these cost pressures, cement pricing?

That interesting, Raashi. You're hitting on both the right questions.

On the pricing, industry has seen a modest improvement of I would say ₹10 in few pockets, let us say ₹15, ₹20, but that in a very selected area, geographies. Otherwise, ballpark for the quarter of March, it around ballpark say ₹10.

Now with demand getting a little softer, the pressure on pricing definitely is higher. Despite the circumstances of costs gone up, unfortunately, industry still under the relentless pressure and not able to pass on the price.

Got it. Just last question for me, what was the capex for the year?

Capex for the year we are keeping it a little moderate and ballpark when you say this year so you're asking for FY '26, FY '26 is closer to about ₹7,500-odd crores. I will just answer because there would be another question, for FY '27, we are keeping estimate of almost 6,000 to ₹6,500 cr, and that too will also basis how things pan out.

It may change a couple of hundred cr here and there, but that's the estimate what we have.

Got it. Thank you.

Hi, thank you for the opportunity. Congratulations on increasing both trade sales and premium mix.

On that note, if I look at slide 27, the realization has hardly moved Q-o-Q versus peers it is up somewhere between 1.5% to 2%. Is it mainly because of mix or what is driving this weaker realization?

Indrajit, absolutely you are right. I think the journey has just begun when we change the gears, and therefore you will see it more differentiated benefits coming in the subsequent quarters.

What we have done is we have sustained the price levels at ₹254 a bag compared to in December. From our own December quarter, we are up by say modestly at say ₹1 and compared to say last year we were at say 255.

Yes, the journey would further see improvements with higher blended cement and more premium cement sales. It is just begun.

Sure.

Thank you. Second, if I look at your blended utilization for next year, would be at best 71%, 72% on your expanded, let's say weighted average capacity.

On that note, probably you will not need additional capacity in FY '28 as well. Is that what is driving a more calibrated capex approach?

I have Karan Bhai also to answer this question. Just a sec.

Yeah.

I think how we would look at capex is two, three things. One is when we look at our performance, we know where are the places we need to improve on.

There are certain capacity which is there, which is in the wrong places, and so we will be adding few capacity in places which will help us in terms of reducing our costs, logistics cost especially, as well as help us improve our penetration into those markets. I'm talking specifically into the markets where we have high market share and high recall value.

Those are the places that we would definitely look at expanding our capacity over there. The second thing is as we are expanding our clinker capacity, the correspondingly GU capacity will also increase.

This year, apart from Rajasthan and Maharashtra, as you know that we've won a limestone block in Assam. Again that's a completely new territory for us.

That is one new area which we will start in maybe end of this year. The second new area that we will be starting is in Mundra, which is again a completely new clinker line.

These are the two new projects apart from the new GUs that will help us in terms of reducing our costs.

Thanks so much for the elaborate answer, sir. One last one if I may, in light of this, how would we see any inorganic opportunity that comes up?

Would you be interested or the focus would squarely be on organic growth right now?

Inorganically we keep evaluating, but our focus right now is on organic development and greenfield expansion. That is our number one priority.

Sure. Thanks a lot.

Hello. Thank you for the opportunity.

Sir, my first question is regarding the cost structure, especially in the fourth quarter also we saw that the fixed cost, which is employee plus other cost, has increased significantly Y-o-Y and versus when we compare it to your peers also. I just wanted to understand why you say there were some West Asian conflicts that impacted the cost.

However, the conflict started towards the end of February and the packaging cost was also in the mid of March, which impacted the industry. I want to understand why among all your peers, Ambuja is seeing such an increase in its cost structures.

Secondly, in your presentation you have also mentioned that the freight cost was high because of some plant shutdowns. If I'm not wrong, in third quarter also you took plant shutdowns.

Normally the industry takes shutdowns in the second quarter. In quarter three and quarter four, where the volume growth was really strong, the management decided to take plant shutdowns, which resulted in higher costs.

I just want to understand what is the rationale behind taking plant shutdowns in volume push quarters and why are Ambuja's fixed costs increasing way higher than its peers? My first question is regarding this.

Jashandeep, I think when Raashi asked this and we have tried to explain, in terms of peaking out on our cost at 4,500, which I mentioned, and from here you will see improvements. Your question is in terms of compared to the competition, why.

Now few components which are relevant to my business, I mentioned about a higher focus now on the branding, advertisement to promote the trade sales and premium cement. Second is in terms of higher repairs and maintenance costs, and you're right that ideally one should do it during the off-seasons like monsoons, but not all the machines can be done during that period, and there have been few breakdowns also of the acquired assets of Penna's and all.

Under the planning and also under out-of-planning you will do it, therefore there have been those additional expenses of repairs and maintenance. Then in terms of the bag cost, which although yeah, came it in the last week of February to the overall say full month of March.

When you promote and sell more premium cement, then there are also some additional costs of logistics and handling, which also seeps into to increase your cost. I also mentioned to you the journey which we want to achieve in terms of improved heat consumption, it is still not coming in the range, and therefore we still have a higher heat consumption, and I would say ballpark 35, 40 kcal minimum which we have to improve.

Again I would attribute to some of the acquired assets. Actually when I look at the EBITDA of Ambuja and ACC, minus of the acquired assets, the EBITDA is actually higher by ₹70, ₹80, it will be almost like ₹800 and actually more when I normalize it, but it is at least ₹800.

I would say that the acquired assets still are not basically coming in the range to our desired level, and for which I'd mentioned that the first priority is stabilize the overall operations, achieve a good level of performance improvement. Hence in I think maybe couple of months we had taken the entire investor community to Sanghi plant just to showcase that how Sanghi is now in the state of readiness and give higher improved volume improvement.

This I think we did somewhere

in March

itself, right? March itself.

Now that is, for example, we want to showcase that yes, some of these assets have taken time, but now they're in the state of readiness. Sooner that I will take all of you to Penna assets also, but before that we took you to Marwar.

Now so the journey is known, the issues are known, and therefore in my opening remarks also I mentioned about certain disappointments to us also, where we think that 4,500 is on a higher side and we are basically in a position to bring it down in coming quarters. Therefore you will see this is peaked out and you will see an improvement prospectively from here.

Thank you for the detailed answer, sir. My next question is largely taking forward Navin's question only.

Ambuja is the only company which has given such a bearish scenario for FY '27, and I understand the rationale that you have given behind it. With 5% industry growth and Ambuja expecting an 8% growth, there are certain capacities which are coming, I completely understand that.

What is your target utilization from the assets of Sanghi, Orient, and Penna for FY '27? I understand there are some challenges, will there be additional capex required to bring the acquired assets to Ambuja's set of standards?

Just want to understand this.

Thank you, Jashandeep. Like Orient, for example, is operating at full capacity.

Far as Sanghi is concerned, I will peg myself at almost like 65% to 70%, and so far as Penna is concerned, I will consider around 55% to 60% in terms of the utilization factors. The existing assets of Ambuja and ACC, I would peg it to closer to around 75% to 80%.

On a overall basis at the Ambuja consol level average, in the situation the scenario which I have mentioned to you, I would say 70%, 75% ballpark utilization, and you're right, we anticipate the softer demand, and therefore we would go with this belief. If for any surprises positive in the industry, and which we would all wish to, these numbers will definitely look positive.

As of now, situation is softer.

Sir, any further capex to bring these assets to Ambuja standards?

As mentioned by Karan Bhai, the overall say disciplined approach of capex, where we want to now set up in the high-potential market, which we have now completely done a mapping, where we have market leadership, he has already indicated few of the assets in his narrative. Progressively now, for example, let me first commission the existing assets in hand, which are ongoing, basically this 10 million, and come to you all with stabilization and achievement of the capacity for them.

Passing quarters, then we will also highlight to you the capex program as it firms up. Mundra for example, Karan Bhai had mentioned Mundra is very much now in the pipeline, and so are few assets which he mentioned.

Understood, sir. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Good evening and thank you for taking my questions. Vinod Bhai, I just wanted to ask, we have talked quite a bit about fiscal '27 and outlook, but what I'm trying to reconcile is how should we reconcile between the improvements that you're planning in fiscal '27, is that dependent, how much of that is dependent on internal execution versus external normalization?

Maybe if you can just help us understand that.

I would say, Manish Bhai, thank you. A very good question.

I would say that the external factors will affect most of the industry players. Therefore, I will give more weightages on the internal factors and the execution of the same, which will bring the overall differentiation and leadership leverage on that.

That I would put it in this manner.

Manish, if I may just come here, Karan here. I think if you look at our performance, we realize that where the gaps are, and that's exactly where we are hyper-focused on and improving on those performance.

Based on whatever guidance we're giving, this is 100% which is controllable by us. If you're not able to achieve the guidance, it's purely because of our internal execution and not any other factor.

That's where the whole team is really focused on and delivering on the numbers now that we are talking about. We're very confident that this year we will be able to hit the numbers that we are talking about.

Thank you, Karan Bhai.

Okay. The other, my second follow-up is on the premium products.

Now they constitute about 35% to 36% of trade. What should be the realistic target that we should have in our models as we go out to fiscal '27 and maybe even beyond?

What's the upside to that 35% to 36%?

Manish, right now, for example, I would say that 36% is a good number for us to sustain, and therefore that is what, for example, can be considered in terms of the share of premium cement as percentage of trade sales.

Okay. Wonderful.

Thank you so much. I'll get back in the queue.

Thank you.

Good evening. My question is on cost again.

In the last third quarter concall, which happened around start of the February, management talked about cost of ₹4,000. Yes, we are talking about ₹4,100 ₹4,000 in January.

We're talking about ₹4,100 in exit of this quarter. How the quarter cost is ₹4,500, I'm unable to understand.

Other question is on balance sheet. Your ACC's operating cash flows are negative, sharply negative for the year, and your overall consolidated Ambuja's cash flows also negatively impacted by negative working capital.

Can you throw some light on this? Thank you.

Thanks, Prateek. I will take the second question first.

In terms of the ACC, Ambuja, if you see, ACC has receivable from Ambuja under the MSA, and you also would be aware that we have taken shareholders approval in terms of the ICD, wherein this receivables will get paid off. Like you will find in the in the coming quarter, this will get knocked off with the ICD, number one.

It's like as a one consol business under the MSA, the receivables are there, therefore ACC will find negative operating cash flow. Far as Ambuja is concerned, I think if you would have seen, we have a good level of inventory, which is higher, but when it comes to receivables, these are under good control with the higher degree of trade sales, and therefore on a overall working capital of Ambuja, you will see only improvement for the March quarter compared to December quarter.

Your question about about the cost, Prateek, I think what we had envisaged to what is the reality, yes, there are differences because of the overall acquired assets situations, and many times those anticipations, for example, have not worked upon, and then suddenly the packing bags situation which have come up. With also, for example, when Navin mentioned about that the 10% growth, we also lost a good level of volume because of the packing bags issues and all.

There are these situations which will which will have to be dealt with, but luckily now at least we know that this is the peak level of safe cost which we have hit. From here, for example, as Karan Bhai also mentions, that the numbers will be tapering down with every passing quarter.

Reasons I have already explained right from branding to repairs and maintenance to the higher freight cost, the higher lead, for example, the AGTs, or the, for example, when it comes to EBITDA, the lower government incentives which we are now, that also, for example, we we we have a lower government incentive, a, because of the GST rates which have come down, b, we have also exhausted some of the plants which were giving all having the incentives, and third, in some of the states we are now accruing on incentive on on on virtual visibility basis basically, certainty basis basically, so that we don't want to have pending long-term accruals and all. There are combination of this accounting policies and and the the situation of some of the plants which have not matured to what we thought, more so for the acquired assets.

Yeah.

Sure. Just one clarification.

When

One clarification. In the opening remarks, it was said that you had ₹4,100 of cost.

Is it just a day cost or a month cost or a last batch? What is that cost?

No, that was we had basically hit it ₹4,100 for the month of March, Prateek. As I said that except the escalations of war, for example, almost ₹250, which affected us, on a normalized basis I was saying 4,100 for the month of March.

Sure. Okay.

Thank you. I'll get back to the queue.

Hi gentlemen. Thanks for taking my question.

Just my question is also following up with the previous question on the cost front. If you see, on the first week of February when we had the last concall, and if I may quote the average cost for the quarter was ₹4,500 along with the one-offs, whereas we have exited December quarter well below ₹4,000 of cost.

That was the commentary on the first week of February. I understand we do carry a good amount of inventory as well, at least a month on that account for most of the raw material and the inputs on that part.

Furthermore, we had some one-off in the Q3. We have increased or enhanced our premium contribution in this quarter.

Pricing was slightly better than the previous quarters. Usually this is a better quarter.

This should logically contribute towards the better profitability. Despite everything and also with the just previous answer that March month was ₹4,100 cost, trying to understand how to add up the entire cost for the quarter on the light of the previous commentary of mid-December ₹4,000 that was given on first week of February, with the inventory which generally the people carry, along with your commentary currently on the March ₹4,100 average cost.

Also the reasons which you just mentioned, most of them are external macro factors which should impact every player or most of the players in this industry. Far whatever results we have seen from the large guys or the smaller guys or the mid-sized guys, this factors are not affecting too much on a in totality in this quarter, in Q4.

Just wanted to understand how should we reconcile your last quarter commentary along with the exact number which has been reported, along with the peers who have reported numbers, then how should we look at baked in our outlook on that? If you could help us just understand.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. No, I think, see, basically when in the December, for example, we have been very upbeat in terms of some of the turnarounds which you will see in some of our acquired assets of Penna, for example, more so specially, and as Penna is geographically more in say south.

If you actually look at the numbers and south, for example, have been one of the most affected geography for the March quarter. Therefore, we have taken some of the machines on shutdown, and basically there have been couple of breakdowns also, and therefore which has increased my higher repairs and maintenance for the quarter of March, number one.

Number two, in terms of some of the acceleration which we have to give to our sales and branding and advertisement is what we have given, and results of the same we will get actually as an investment on our supply chain. This will more be accounted as a operating cost, so that is where, for example, the branding and advertisement costs are higher.

Then of course, for the month of March, there have been this abnormal cost for the packing, for example, and we have also seen a higher fuel cost and higher fuel consumption also. For example, the moment if you don't have a right blend of fuel, the heat consumption is also higher.

Those also, for example, the technical KPIs have got affected. Now that was when we also in December our quarter was at ₹4,500 of cost for the quarter, 4,500, and March also, for example, we are almost at say 4,500.

Yeah. I think look it in this manner that certain planned movements for the March could not fructify or we could not also fulfill, and therefore we have basically been at the same level to what we were in December '25.

Yeah. I understand that part of 4,500 versus 4,500.

I'm just trying to reconcile the commentary mid-quarter of 4,000 exit in December vis-a-vis current commentary of 4,100 for the month of March. Just because of one month in February, just trying to understand how the entire cost shoots up because of that when we know that inventory gets carried on for a couple of months, which is there.

I'll appreciate if you can share us a quantification of large cost items along with the benefits also which has come in from exit of ₹4,000 to now exit of in March. May not be now, but later on also if you can release that.

No, I can explain because the commentary I think again even if you remember the last call, I had always said that the exit month of March. While you are considering for the whole March quarter of '26, the commentary was more about our aspiration and our plan to get closer to 4,000 by month of March.

Now basically, therefore while the average would still be higher and not at 4,000, therefore please don't mistake with 4,000 as average for the March quarter, number one. Number two, of course, therefore I was highlighting that month of March, for example, barring this aberration of the West Asia crisis, and you might say that we would have got a little bit affected more as compared to others could be, but yes, we got affected with the overall packing bags and all, and therefore the pressure of volumes and therefore the pressure on sales and hence behind advertisement, branding, or sales promotion have been there.

Therefore we unfortunately could not come below 4,500 for this entire quarter of March '26.

Yeah.

No problem. I'll take it offline.

Thank you.

Sir, thank you for taking my questions. I have a couple of them.

One is, sir, for the Sanghi plant, which is operating at 57% utilization, how important is for the Naliya railway line to be ready, and how far do you see Naliya being connected and ramp-up in volumes at Sanghi? That's question number one, sir.

Pulkit, our base model is not linked to Naliya railway line. It is more with our marine infra, for example, and therefore as you would know that we have already ordered seven vessels, which will be delivered in a progressive manner starting from next year.

That is what, for example, Sanghi will bring the strength. Then otherwise we are counting on the road movement from Sanghi.

The railway line only will be an add-on, but not being considered in the base model.

Sure. The plan is to ramp up even if Naliya takes a little longer to be ready.

Is that the right way to look at it?

Yes. For right now, although in Sanghi we don't have a ramp-up per se of capacity expansion, but yes, ramp-up of the existing capacity, the utilization part, correct.

Absolutely, sir. My second question is, is it fair to assume that as and when there is a final resolution on the JP assets, that those assets would come to us or is there a possibility given that we already have our own organic growth plan, a lot of work to do on increasing capacity utilization, that we could also not be considering having those assets?

How should we look at it?

Pulkit, I will still consider that for JP, the RP is another listed company, and therefore it would be inappropriate from my side to answer anything on that. As things progress, whatever development happens will come to know.

Thank you, sir. I have two questions.

My first question is given Ambuja is the fourth company to have reported earnings, and the EBITDA per ton is the lowest with high cost inflation, do you see the industry and the company raising cement prices in the next few months to pass on the full cost inflation, or can we expect further margin deterioration with the inability to raise cement prices?

Pinakin, I would say that given the scenario of demand will be very important to basically see the price being passed on to the customers. As of now, I anticipate the overall demand looks to be for right now when I look at say April and now in May, a little subdued and soft.

Therefore, for example, when you attempt for say x, I would be happy even if the industry gets half of the same. That is, for example, right now the situation is.

Yes, costs on the other side has gone up by at least ₹25. That is the only way then to resolve and protect the margin is to focus on our own cost of production, and that is therefore I was highlighting the internal factor will be playing more important, what Manish Somaiya had asked.

The internal factor will be more important compared to the external factor.

Sure. My second question is given Ambuja's cost delivery has been all over the place over the last few quarters, can you give us some guidance when you move away from cost to EBITDA per ton by FY '28, given where your EBITDA per ton is today and over the next two years, where do you see the EBITDA per ton reach, and what are the building blocks of that margins?

What kind of price increases, what kind of cost savings, what kind of turnarounds do you want to see or do you expect in the next two years?

Pinakin, I think it will be a herculean task for any industry person to give any estimate of EBITDA per ton at this stage. I would rather still continue my efforts on cost, and therefore, for example, one thing is ₹4,500 a ton, let us say it peaks out and then it starts coming down from here.

Towards journey we will go, I think progressively we'll keep you posted, and especially in next two, three quarters as things looks more brighter and clearer. For right now, cost remains the key focus area.

Obviously, when you focus on trade sales and when you focus on premium cement, this will keep giving you more mitigations. I think any guidance on EBITDA will be difficult at this stage.

Let me just add that cost we are looking at roughly ₹200 to ₹250 a ton reduction this year, and then another reduction of ₹250 next year as well. That is a minimum reduction that we are looking at.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Hi. Thank you for taking my question.

My first question is now that you have talked about cumulatively ₹500 per ton of cost improvement over the next couple of years, are we shying away from the earlier target of ₹3,650 that you had shared earlier? That is my question number one.

We are not shying away from our target. I think as we told earlier also, we need to focus on our execution.

There are multiple steps on the cost that we need to take, between manufacturing, between raw material, and between logistics. We are confident that we will be able to achieve that number.

I think it's just we are giving you realistic in terms of where we will be able to achieve in next two years' time. That does not mean that we don't have the runway to go to the earlier target that we have set.

We know what are the steps we need to take. We know where we need to improve in terms of our efficiency, and that's where we are focused on.

This is something, the 500 is what we can commit right now for the next two years.

Got it. I have one more clarification that I want, Karan, is you talked about shifting away from 155 million ton capacity.

Just a clarification that the company had earlier guided for 15 million ton of debottlenecking exercises across assets. Does that stay or there will be some change on that as well?

Those still continues. I think it's just timing, which will differ based on where we get the maximum return on the investment.

Got it. Thank you.

One final question. I remember in second quarter and third quarter, the company was already accelerating your branding and advertisement cost.

It would be helpful if you can help us understand what would be overall branding and advertisement cost for full fiscal '26. Thank you.

For the full fiscal year '26, we are closer to almost ₹700 a ton basically, ₹70 a ton basically. Yeah, ₹70 a ton basically, on the full year basis of '26.

Hi. Thanks for the opportunity.

One question for Karan Bhai, one for Vinod Ji. Karan Bhai, one question, what prompted us for a reset right now?

If you could highlight five key monitorables that probably you have set for yourself for next one year, and how does SLA fit in an overall scheme of things after the reset?

Sorry, can you repeat that question? I couldn't hear you properly.

Yeah.

The first question is what prompted us for a reset right now? Second, what are the five key monitorables that you have laid out for yourself?

Third, how does SLA fit in overall scheme of things after the reset?

I think why the reset, it's quite evident our performance has not been great. We've not been able to deliver what we have promised to our shareholders, and so that is number one.

I think if we have to assess ourself, we really need to improve on our cost. That is number one.

I think the key KPIs that we're putting for ourselves is we need to I would say five things that we need to focus on. One is L1 plants delivering to the markets, the discipline on L1 plants delivering to the respective markets.

Second discipline is on trade versus non-trade sales. Number three is on our raw material consumption, reducing our cost on raw material as well as on the electricity front, energy consumption.

Number four is improving our I would say channel network in terms of to help us increase our sales. I think these are the five things, but predominantly if I would say 80% of it is to do with the cost, and we really need to get our act in order in terms of to make sure that we are able to reduce our cost.

That is what we're looking at, and until the time we are not able to deliver on what we are promising, I don't think so it makes sense to make more capital investment because you don't get the returns on those capital invested as well. On SLA?

You had a second question?

On SLA, service agreements, I think for a few of the plants that we have tied up with, how should we look at that on overall...

SLA-based contracts, this is something that is part of these initiatives because we do believe that what we need our teams to focus on and where do they need to put their energy on. We do believe that there are, at least in India now there are enough competent partners out there who can run the plants at the efficiency level that we would aspire to.

That's how we're looking at. Second, obviously given the history of Ambuja and ACC, I think the SLA partners help us in terms of cleaning up all the past union issues and all of that.

From that perspective, it really helps us in terms of reducing our cost and improving our efficiency.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

Hi sir, good evening. Sir, it is great to see explicit capital discipline.

In that context, I just want to understand this ₹65 to ₹70 billion of annual capex for the next two years that we're talking about, can you break it down ballpark in terms of growth versus cost efficiency versus any other initiative that it includes?

Roughly 4 billion is what is already the capex which is already under execution, and it is implementation of that, which includes capacity, which includes WHRS, which includes your fly ash transportation system that we need. The balance is, I would say, debottlenecking plus maintenance capex.

Yeah. Ashish, basically, I hope that answers your question.

Yeah. Thank you.

Hi, all. Thanks for the opportunity.

I just wanted to understand more from a strategy perspective when Adani had acquired these cement assets, you had voiced out ambition to kind of become the industry leader and double capacity and volume. In that context, the current guidance seems to be quite subdued.

Is it fair to say that there is a reset in ambition kind of from the earlier

kind of

thought that was there at the time of acquisition?

We'll be honest with you. Yes, partially there is a reset.

We're not moving away from the target. Yes, we're moving away from the timeline.

That is to do with we know that we have not delivering in terms of what we had committed. It definitely makes sense to step back, to look back, and to see where we're going wrong and to course correct.

Then that's where we are. That's why we're giving you the new guidance in terms of what is the revised capacity enhancement that we're looking at and the timeline that we're looking.

Sure. Thanks.

Is there a target IRR in mind when you are doing your capex program now?

Project IRR has to be 18%. This is all equity money.

You have to look at equity return like anybody else.

Sure. Thanks a lot, yeah.

Hi, good evening. Am I audible?

Thanks for the opportunity, and heartening to know that the renewed focus is more graded on capex and also focus on cost execution. My only question while we have been candid on the guidance, when you say ₹250 cost reduction you're looking for FY '27 over FY '26, and at the same time, from exit Q4, we are seeing around ₹250 to ₹300 cost inflation because of the packaging and fuel price increase.

Is this ₹250 net-off or net-net you would see ₹300-odd increase and ₹250 decline. From current level, you would still see our cost going up by ₹50 to ₹100 in Q1 or in FY '27?

Rajesh, thank you. What we would put it is ₹4,500 is the peak, and this ₹250 reduction is from here.

Essentially then

it would mean to ₹4,250 as a target for '27.

Right. This is factoring in the cost inflation that we are already in place?

Yes, that is true.

Okay. In Q1 also, you are looking at similar cost structure?

In Q1... In Q1...

...versus Q4 versus Q1, what sort of cost number you are looking at versus the current cost inflation and your cost savings?

Right now, for example, the headwind still continues, and therefore it could be flattish for Q1. As things comes out better, that it will start tapering.

Sir, sorry for the flattish means your current cost, which is some of the cost inflation is factored in Q4, the energy and packaging.

Almost ₹4,500 I would peg it for say Q1, and then from there we will have the reduction journey continue. For the year therefore we are targeting to have a reduction of ₹250.

Right. On the non-core working capital, core working capital has come down year-on-year from 30 days to 20 days.

If I look at your non-core working capital ex-cash, that seems to have gone up significantly. Is there any strategic reasons, from 14 days it has now gone up to 49 days, that is where your total non-cash working capital seems to have shot up significantly from ₹1,300 crores to ₹5,500?

Rajesh, therefore, for example, some of the points which I mentioned that on certain incentives and all, now we will be looking to book it on actual basis when received then the actual basis, for example, so that this non-core working capital or operating working capital can be controlled. Second is, I think some of these which you are referring to could be purely accounting working capital.

Maybe separately we can connect. Generally the core working capital, as you also mentioned, has come down, and that efficiency of working capital will continue.

Which specific non-core you are referring to, for example, you can connect to me offline, and I will assist.

Sure, sir. Fine.

Two clinker units which you are, just to conclude this, two clinker plants which you are looking forward to, one was Mundra, not clinker but quasi clinker, and what was the other beyond what is getting commissioned right now? To

the ones which I mentioned was one was so in our 73, for example, the 4 million, and just to correct what Raashi asked me the first question, my current capacity is say 69, and this 4 million ton will have one at Penna, Jodhpur 2 million, and 2 million at Maratha. That would be 73.

Now on top of it, the upcoming Mundra will be another 2 million of clinker. That will be over and above this 4 million which I mentioned.

Then

the Assam one, which will be another 2 million. That

will be

pair of additional new assets.

That would actually state two, three years from now?

That would be, let us say, 24 to 28 years, 28 months is what we are targeting.

Yes, that's all from my side. Thank you and all the best.

Thank you.

Thank you. Sir, just to clarify, this ₹250 cost reduction, this is on a full year average FY '27 that we are saying?

Thanks, Shravan. This is for the full year FY '27 as a average.

Therefore, for example, when I said that June quarter will be flat from the March quarter, then the degree of acceleration will have to be more for the rest three quarters. You're right, the ₹250 will be average for the year.

Got it. Second, when you mention about the prices, was it ₹10 on the ₹15, ₹20 hike that you mentioned, this was for the April you wanted to say or this is for March?

Currently on an average from the exit of March, have the prices for us increased by ₹10-odd? That's what we are trying to say?

Yes, basically I was hinting on that only. April over say March as a trend for the hike cost.

Okay. Lastly, for full year FY '26, RMC EBITDA in Q4 you mentioned ₹102 crore, but for full year FY '26, what could be the number?

Just a sec. I will just dig on this number.

Full year RMX EBITDA you're asking, right?

Yes, sir.

Around ₹300 crore. Full year RMX EBITDA is a number of ₹300 crore basically for the FY '26.

Got it, sir. Thank you and hope we would be achieving our cost reduction targets and maybe revisiting and then upgrading the original targets.

Thank you.

Yes, Shravan, thank you very much.

Hi sir. Good afternoon.

Sir, just one question from the capex side. Our capex is continuously getting delayed as a Adani standard.

We are known for a pro-capex and a very fast execution. At a cement side, we are continuously getting delayed, especially like Maratha plant we have already delayed.

Plus our earlier plant also got delayed for this one, Chhattisgarh one. What is the issue behind and continuously we are getting some breakdowns at our bigger plants.

Is it the maintenance-related issue or what we are facing currently right now?

You're right. Your observation is right that our capex has not been up to the mark, and that's one of the reasons why we are pausing and correcting ourselves.

We want to first complete our projects that we've taken in our hand before we start any new projects. One of the main reasons why we have not been able to deliver as per what our standards are is two, three things.

I think one is we did not choose the right contractor for execution. Number two is we started these projects when we acquired Ambuja and ACC, and at that time there was no team.

It took us time to build up that team as well. We are confident that at least now we will be able to complete this project in the timeline that were given.

Number three is a lot of these projects were started without full engineering being done in place. We are using this six months to complete all our engineering for the new projects that we're thinking of starting.

Once that is in place, then we will be looking at starting the project. That's where you are, but you're right.

That's a correct observation that we've not been able to deliver projects in the stipulated time. Number two, I think the breakdown, I would say it is predominantly in the acquisition assets where we've seen major breakdowns happening, especially Penna and Sanghi.

That's where the problem area has been for us, and that's where the team is focused on in terms of improving the reliability of the plants. That's one of the reasons why you are seeing a higher R&M cost in this year, partially because a lot of the repairs and maintenance, which was supposed to be done was not done and which is why one of the reasons for this breakdown as well.

Thank you.

sir.

Good evening to the management. Thank you for the opportunity.

My first question is that in your pursuit to focus on premiumization, what is the current average gap between Ambuja brand versus the nearest competitor currently and what is the target to narrow it further? That's my first question.

You are referring to premium cement, and I can highlight that the gap between my base product and the premium cement product is closer to let us say ₹50, ₹55 for the super premium and ₹20, ₹25 for the premium one. I think that was first.

Then second, your question is about the gap between our price and compared to that competition. I think, see, everyone looks to his price better than others, and therefore every time when the industry people try and compare, there's always different opinions.

I would say that the pan-India players like us and basically the other player, number one, UltraTech, I think the prices are more or less in the similar range. In few districts, ₹5, ₹10 here and there, either they are higher or we are lower or whatever reverse way.

That's how the trend has been. That is also reflected in the overall say NSP of the quarter, which is closer to each other for the number one and number two.

Hi, thank you. This question is for Karan.

Karan, just wanted to understand the comment you made about recalibrating capacities, that earlier the capacities were not in the right location. Now the capacity is looking up in the right location.

Where were you initially looking at these capacities? I believe Sanghi was also there in terms of expansion initially.

Maybe could you just discuss where is this recalibration coming from in terms of capacities?

No, the recalibration is coming basically, especially where we have the integrated units. Those are the locations where we are recalibrating because we find that the grinding units, the operating cost, the logistics cost, one of the reasons for the logistics cost being so high compared to competition is because the distance traveled by the integrated units is quite higher than what it should be.

One of the things that we are working towards is shutting down the grinding units in a lot of these places and moving them closer to the market. That is the recalibration we are looking at.

I don't think so we are looking at recalibration of let's say clinker units. The second is Sanghi is predominantly a clinker plus cement.

We are moving towards in the next three years you will see Sanghi moving predominantly into clinker, and you will see new capacities coming up on the coastal region of Gujarat, and Dahej Line 2 is one of the classic examples of that, where we would look at Sanghi supplying clinker and moving and cement being supplied from these GUs. Some of these recalibration is happening.

Majority of the recalibration is happening in the north, UP and Bihar region, and southern Gujarat. Southern Gujarat and Maharashtra.

This is not something ACC specific, because I believe ACC had more integrated units, what you're mentioning for these locations?

It's both. It's ACC and Ambuja, both of them had issues.

I'll give you an example that today we supply our Bihar market through Chhattisgarh and though we get the EBITDA, but it is not the optimal movement of the cement that we are seeing. That's where we need to set up grinding units in Bihar to serve the Bihar market, and Chhattisgarh unit should be just a clinker unit.

Thank you, Karan Bhai, for joining the call and sharing your insight. Thank you, all.

I trust most questions have been answered. You have my contact number.

Please feel free to call me. Thank you.