Hamat Shuts Turkish Production and Moves MCP From Loss-Making Plant to Asset Sale
Stopping MCP production is not only a cost cut. Hamat is closing a plant that no longer served the group well, examining a sale of land and equipment, and still has to prove that external sourcing improves sanitary-ware profitability without hurting supply.
Hamat decided to stop production at MCP, its wholly owned Turkish subsidiary that manufactures ceramic sanitary ware. This is not a routine efficiency announcement. MCP was supposed to give the group control over production of toilets and sinks, mainly for group subsidiaries, but internal volumes were not enough, sales outside Israel did not solve the problem, and competition from Far East imports intensified. The decision moves the center of the analysis from operations to asset monetization: how much impairment will be recorded on machinery and equipment with depreciated cost of NIS 53.5 million, and how much value can be extracted from land and buildings carried at NIS 28.8 million against an external valuation of NIS 97 million. If Hamat finds alternative manufacturers without hurting product availability and quality, the MCP shutdown can improve sanitary-ware profitability. If the transition brings higher procurement costs, inventory needs or supply friction, the savings will be only partial.
The Plant No Longer Served the Group's Supply Chain
MCP handled production of ceramic sanitary ware, mainly toilets and sinks. In its June 19 filing, Hamat cites several connected reasons for the continued losses: insufficient demand from group subsidiaries, difficulty marketing products in Turkey and other non-Israeli markets, and stronger competition from imported products from the Far East.
The business meaning is that the original advantage of internal manufacturing eroded. A wholly owned plant should give the group control over cost, availability, quality and product. When group subsidiaries do not provide enough purchase volume, that advantage turns into fixed costs, employees, maintenance and underused equipment. The production stop is therefore not only a cost-cutting step. It is an admission that self-manufacturing no longer provides Hamat with a clear advantage over external sourcing.
The immediate cost is relatively clear. Hamat estimates employee termination costs at about NIS 1.7 million, and expects ongoing costs afterward to be immaterial. The larger question is not severance cost. It is MCP's balance sheet and the value that can be recovered from its assets.
Land and Buildings Matter More Than Machinery
The filing separates two asset groups. Machinery and equipment are carried at about NIS 53.5 million as of March 31, and Hamat already expects an impairment on part of them, without yet being able to quantify it. Land and buildings, excluding machinery and equipment, are carried at NIS 28.8 million, compared with an external valuation of about NIS 97 million as of December 31.
| MCP item | Filing data | Meaning for Hamat |
|---|---|---|
| Employee termination cost | About NIS 1.7 million | Relatively defined one-time cost |
| Machinery and equipment | About NIS 53.5 million depreciated cost | Expected impairment, still unquantified |
| Land and buildings excluding equipment | About NIS 28.8 million carrying value | Low accounting base |
| External valuation for land and buildings | About NIS 97 million | Potential asset-sale value |
The gap between the carrying value of land and buildings and the external valuation is what keeps this from being only a story of closing a loss-making plant. If Hamat disposes of the full activity or monetizes the assets separately at a price close to the valuation, part of the machinery hit can be offset through a physical asset transaction. If buyers price the site mainly as surplus machinery or hard-to-realize land, the impairment can dominate the story.
External Production Must Reach Profitability, Not Only Lower Losses
Hamat stresses that it is not leaving sanitary ware. It is stopping self-production at MCP and will continue operating in the category by finding alternative manufacturers. That is the difference between exiting an activity and changing the supply chain.
The positive path is clear: the group stops funding a plant with insufficient volume, lowers fixed costs, moves to suppliers better matched to market pricing, and continues selling through its existing distribution system. In that path, the sanitary-ware activity can improve even without a major change in revenue, because unit cost and operating losses decline.
The less attractive path sits in details Hamat has not yet disclosed. Alternative manufacturers can offer better prices, but they can also require different payment terms, higher inventory, longer delivery times or product compromises. In building-products and sanitary ware, availability and quality are part of the ability to preserve customers and brands. The next important disclosure is therefore not only the impairment amount, but whether external production actually improves the segment's profitability.
The Next Filings Need the Impairment and Realization Price
Hamat expects to remain in compliance with its financial covenants after implementing the decision. That is an important protection point, but it does not yet make the event economically positive. The balance sheet will be affected by the impairment on machinery and equipment, and by the price Hamat can obtain for the activity, land, buildings or equipment.
The current read is that Hamat made a sensible operating decision. A loss-making plant that no longer creates a clear internal advantage should not stay open just because it is wholly owned. Shareholder value will be determined in two later steps. First, how much of MCP's accounting value is written down. Then, how much cash Hamat can recover from the land, buildings and equipment, and whether the sanitary-ware activity improves once it moves to alternative suppliers.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.