Sunday, 13 November 2016

Cartels are Great...if you own them!


Cartels Good, Competition bad… at least in Namibia and Botswana

The spread of economic ideology is  truly fascinating. For years now the Competition authorities of Namibia and  Botswana  and the entire African continent for that matter have been trying to spread the good book of the free market. Just get rid of cartels, which are associations of companies that act to limit competition and maintain prices above what would otherwise be market levels, and we will reach the nirvana of free markets and free trade. However, nothing could be more wrong in the case of Namibia and Botswana.

Recently the Namibian competition Authority acting chief executiveMrVitalisNdalikokule, said the commission will continue fighting cartels operating in the country's economy. He has commissioned an essay writing competition for Namibian students to explain that Hallelujah , the market is good and cartels are the viscous nasty enemy of the free market that  we all believe in. If MrNdaalikoukule really wants to tackle anti-competitive practices then perhaps he should start with the country’s biggest firm De Beers. But perhaps MrNdaalikoukulewouldsimply prefer to keep hisjob and leave De Beers alone.

For 90 years until about 2002 De Beers maintained what is widely regarded in economics as  the world’s most effective cartel. The De Beers Central Selling Organization maintained strict control of the supply of diamonds and severely punished anyone who tried to get in their way. Ask  diamantaire Lev Leviev or those who managed diamonds in Mbotu’s Zaire or even the Soviets how effective they were in policing the global diamond market to make sure they maximized profits and they will tell how good they were at their job. With the massive profits accumulated by De beers in the 19th century Cecil Rhodes,thegrand father of all African war lords and the the founder of the De beers cartel,  plundered Zimbabwe all in the name of British civilization.

So how can anyone say that De Beers was good for Namibia and Botswana. Most of the profits in the diamond value chain come from  mining and De Beers protected the value of its assets ie the mines. In 1900 there were 1 Mcts of diamonds mined. Global diamond production peaked in 2005 at 176Mcts. So how can a product which has increased so enormously in supply maintain its  market value?  While commercially valuable deposits of diamonds  are very  rare, diamonds are nothing more than a semi-precious stone in terms of absolute scarcity. But diamonds  are certainly not  a semi-precious stone in terms of price.  What makes them valuable and what made Namibia and Botswana, as important global producers,  as rich as they are today is the very cartel that  competition authorities would like to destroy. The cartel engaged in what was voted the 20th century’s most successful marketing campaign  ‘Diamonds are forever’ , diamonds are a girls’ best friend etc etc. This really worked and after World war II  De Beers convinced the average American that they had to part company with two months’ salary to show their intended that they really loved them. But perhaps even more stunning has been the incredible success of De Beers  in the 21st century in convincing Indian and Chinese women in the merging middle classes that diamonds are to be preferred to gold and jade as parts of the wedding exchange. It is with this marketing success in emerging Asian markets that  De beers maintained the export value of Namibia and Botswana’s diamonds and hence the nation’s prosperity . 

Of course there is no longer a cartel in the diamond industry because there is no longer any need for the CSO because after 2002 De Beers embarked upon the ‘Supplier of Choice’ marketing strategy which saw the company move to those parts of the value chain where serious profits are made ie. Mining where it had been for over 120 years and into luxury marketing in a partnership with LVMH. If the reported published accounts of De Beers are to be believed then this was the biggest flop in the history of the diamond industry. Up till 2014 the company was reported to be losing money.  But there is no cartel in the diamond industry now because, as the IMF has recently written Botswana, the junior partner (Botswana owns 15% of De Beers) but dominant  supplier of De beers diamonds ( 65%),   is now the buffer in the global diamond market. When there is excess production there is no need for the old CSO to use up scarce working capital and buy up the excess when you get just Botswana to cut supply and do, in effect,  the same thing. De beers has declined from 80-90% of the world market for diamonds in the mid 1990’s to less than 40% now but it is still the dominant firm in the industry and its supposedly secret prices are the most important commercial artefact in the diamond market. Despite all of the apparent competitive trappings in the industry it remain highly concentrated and run by De beers which is a powerful and dominant oligopoly.

Namibia exports some of the best and most valuable diamonds in the world. If you look at the most Kimberly Process statistics the export price is amongst the highest in the world.In 2013 Namibia exported diamonds at an average price of US$550 per carat while Botswana was receiving only $137/carat. Those diamonds would certainly not be as anywhere as valuable as they are today had it not been for the De Beers cartel/market power  and its continued domination of the global diamond market and its assurance that the consumer continues to believe in the long term scarcity of diamonds.  So what may be true when you are the consumer of the products of a cartel is completely wrong when we are the beneficiaries of that cartel. So MrNdaalikoukule,  cartels are wonderful as long as you are not the receiving end of the cartel price.

These are the views of Professor Roman Grynberg  and not necessarily UNAM where he is employed.

No comments:

Post a Comment