I agree with you that most of the Chemical research in India is derivative in nature but this does not imply that Indian companies once having developed their process in non patented products cannot compete with the best of the world. There are multiple examples like Divis/Laurus/Deepak Nitrite etc. who have all done very well. The product is at par with the best and scale/operating costs etc. ensure business continuity. If we look at China one can clearly see significant growth in R&D, from being a mass producer of low complexity high volume chemicals Chinese company today are at par with their Western counterparts and far exceeds their volume. I think Indian companies too would take a similar path.
I doubt that ’ Arkema (for eg) will almost always have a better product’ and the answer to this is in the development of FP without using PFAS of concern. For example take a look at the response from GFL vs other players. Although the response was voluntary GFL/Chemours responded and the other didn’t. Chemours response seemed quite vague too.
Very difficult to answer this precisely but in general one could see significant demand supply gaps in most FP and PTFE. Further with 3M going out and Solvay’s Italy plant shutting down due to usage of PFAS of concern should help. Setting up FP capacities which have HFCs as RM will be very difficult in the West. The choices they have are limited. Do understand that GFL has been long in the markets developed hundreds of grades of various FPs and does carry significant experience. As far as battery chemicals are concerned what GFL does is yet to be seen but they have said multiple times they are initially looking at international markets.
All investments carry risk, uncertainty, lack of clarity, probability etc. As investors we always deal with a limited understanding and use various models/patterns to extrpolate from past to come up with our own thesis. Even I don’t understand multiple functions including the sales organization at GFL.
Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter |