El Dorado, AZ, United States
El Dorado, AZ, United States

Time filter

Source Type

News Article | May 7, 2017
Site: www.PR.com

Future Market Insights has announced the addition of the “Phosphate Esters Market: Global Industry Analysis and Opportunity Assessment 2017-2027" report to their offering. Valley Cottage, NY, May 07, 2017 --( Phosphate esters possess a competitive advantage over other ester-based fluids in terms of performance and thermal stability. The fire-resistant and anti-wear properties of phosphate esters make them a preferred choice in important applications, such as fire retardants, hydraulic systems, emulsifying agents, lubricants, hydrotropes in cleaning applications, corrosion inhibitors, anti-static agents, and wetting agents. They are also used as plasticizers, solvents, and additives. The most frequently used phosphate esters are malathion, parathion, phosmet, tetrachlorvinphos, azamethiphos, methyl parathion, diazinon, azinphos methyl, and fenitrothion. The numerous and varied applications of phosphate esters, makes their market study imperative. Request For Sample@ http://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/sample/rep-gb-3129 Phosphate Esters Market: Segmentation On the basis of product type, the global phosphate esters market is segmented as follows: Triaryl/alkyl aryl phosphate esters Trialkyl phosphate esters Bis phosphates On the basis of application type, the global phosphate esters market is segmented as follows: Lubricants Surfactants Pesticides Fire Retardants Hydraulic Fluids Plasticizers Paints & Coatings Others Phosphate Esters Market: Key Trends, Drivers It has been observed that prominent manufacturers of phosphate esters worldwide have been focusing on strategic acquisitions and geographical expansions to increase their manufacturing strengths and capabilities, as well as to increase their penetration in regions with high growth potential considering the global phosphate ester market. Request For TOC@ http://www.futuremarketinsights.com/toc/rep-gb-3129 Also, as there has been a significant demand for phosphate esters from the automobile industry, rapid growth of the latter is expected to indirectly drive the market demand for phosphate esters. It has been observed that governments of countries in the Asia Pacific region have been endorsing favorable policies for the production of phosphate esters to meet their respective demands; hence, the region is expected to play a vital role in the development of the phosphate esters market in the next few years. In terms of application, the use of phosphate esters for the manufacture of lubricants is expected to continue to dominate the market, as it has done in recent past. There has been a rising demand globally for different pesticides, herbicides, weedicides and fertilizers, thereby augmenting their manufacture. This trend of the agrochemical industry is also expected to translate into rising demand for phosphate esters, as they find direct applications in the agrochemical industry. Phosphate esters in different forms are finding increasing applications, such as a therapeutic agent and in public recreational spaces, residential landscaping and pest control programs worldwide. However, it should be noted that the manufacture and research and development involving phosphate esters incurs high production costs for producers; lubricant products based on phosphate esters are also found to be relatively expensive. These cost factors could slow down the growth rate of phosphate esters in the near future. Phosphate esters are found to be hazardous, as they could cause skin corrosion in case of skin contact, and could cause serious eye damage in case of contact with the eyes. Phosphate esters are found to cause respiratory tract infections in case of inhalation and are known to be toxic to the aquatic environment. They are also flammable and possess explosive properties to some extent, thereby requiring special storage and handling requirements. Hence, these factors, in turn, could hamper the market growth rate of phosphate esters. Browse Full Report@ http://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/phosphate-esters-market The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified phosphate esters as toxic to humans and wildlife. In the UK, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is the regulatory body associated with the regulation of the use of phosphate esters in agriculture. Besides, other regulatory bodies, such as the Health and Safety Executive, Veterinary Products Committee, Committee on Safety of Medicines, Advisory Committee on Pesticides, and Committee on Toxicity have been into the regulations pertaining to the research and use of phosphate esters. These bodies have been monitoring the harmful effects of phosphate esters on humans, microbes and animals, thereby restricting the market growth. Considering this regulatory perspective, manufacturers have been spending and working towards developing phosphate esters with reduced toxicity levels, such that they could comply with the relevant regulations. Phosphate Esters Market: Market Participants Examples of some of the market participants in the global phosphate esters market are as follows: Chemtura Corporation The Dow Chemical Company Exxon Mobil Castrol Akzo Nobel Elementis Plc Lanxess Rhodia Solutia Elementis Valley Cottage, NY, May 07, 2017 --( PR.com )-- Phosphate esters, popularly known as organophosphates, are esters of phosphoric acid and form the foundation of the production of many agrochemicals. Phosphate esters primarily find applications as lubricant additives. Due to their overall stability, phosphate esters also find applications in numerous industries, such as the flame retardant industry, surfactant industry, detergent industry, food industry, and in wastewater treatment.Phosphate esters possess a competitive advantage over other ester-based fluids in terms of performance and thermal stability. The fire-resistant and anti-wear properties of phosphate esters make them a preferred choice in important applications, such as fire retardants, hydraulic systems, emulsifying agents, lubricants, hydrotropes in cleaning applications, corrosion inhibitors, anti-static agents, and wetting agents. They are also used as plasticizers, solvents, and additives. The most frequently used phosphate esters are malathion, parathion, phosmet, tetrachlorvinphos, azamethiphos, methyl parathion, diazinon, azinphos methyl, and fenitrothion.The numerous and varied applications of phosphate esters, makes their market study imperative.Request For Sample@ http://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/sample/rep-gb-3129Phosphate Esters Market: SegmentationOn the basis of product type, the global phosphate esters market is segmented as follows:Triaryl/alkyl aryl phosphate estersTrialkyl phosphate estersBis phosphatesOn the basis of application type, the global phosphate esters market is segmented as follows:LubricantsSurfactantsPesticidesFire RetardantsHydraulic FluidsPlasticizersPaints & CoatingsOthersPhosphate Esters Market: Key Trends, DriversIt has been observed that prominent manufacturers of phosphate esters worldwide have been focusing on strategic acquisitions and geographical expansions to increase their manufacturing strengths and capabilities, as well as to increase their penetration in regions with high growth potential considering the global phosphate ester market.Request For TOC@ http://www.futuremarketinsights.com/toc/rep-gb-3129Also, as there has been a significant demand for phosphate esters from the automobile industry, rapid growth of the latter is expected to indirectly drive the market demand for phosphate esters.It has been observed that governments of countries in the Asia Pacific region have been endorsing favorable policies for the production of phosphate esters to meet their respective demands; hence, the region is expected to play a vital role in the development of the phosphate esters market in the next few years. In terms of application, the use of phosphate esters for the manufacture of lubricants is expected to continue to dominate the market, as it has done in recent past.There has been a rising demand globally for different pesticides, herbicides, weedicides and fertilizers, thereby augmenting their manufacture. This trend of the agrochemical industry is also expected to translate into rising demand for phosphate esters, as they find direct applications in the agrochemical industry.Phosphate esters in different forms are finding increasing applications, such as a therapeutic agent and in public recreational spaces, residential landscaping and pest control programs worldwide.However, it should be noted that the manufacture and research and development involving phosphate esters incurs high production costs for producers; lubricant products based on phosphate esters are also found to be relatively expensive. These cost factors could slow down the growth rate of phosphate esters in the near future. Phosphate esters are found to be hazardous, as they could cause skin corrosion in case of skin contact, and could cause serious eye damage in case of contact with the eyes. Phosphate esters are found to cause respiratory tract infections in case of inhalation and are known to be toxic to the aquatic environment. They are also flammable and possess explosive properties to some extent, thereby requiring special storage and handling requirements. Hence, these factors, in turn, could hamper the market growth rate of phosphate esters.Browse Full Report@ http://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/phosphate-esters-marketThe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified phosphate esters as toxic to humans and wildlife. In the UK, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is the regulatory body associated with the regulation of the use of phosphate esters in agriculture. Besides, other regulatory bodies, such as the Health and Safety Executive, Veterinary Products Committee, Committee on Safety of Medicines, Advisory Committee on Pesticides, and Committee on Toxicity have been into the regulations pertaining to the research and use of phosphate esters. These bodies have been monitoring the harmful effects of phosphate esters on humans, microbes and animals, thereby restricting the market growth. Considering this regulatory perspective, manufacturers have been spending and working towards developing phosphate esters with reduced toxicity levels, such that they could comply with the relevant regulations.Phosphate Esters Market: Market ParticipantsExamples of some of the market participants in the global phosphate esters market are as follows:Chemtura CorporationThe Dow Chemical CompanyExxon MobilCastrolAkzo NobelElementis PlcLanxessRhodiaSolutiaElementis Click here to view the list of recent Press Releases from Future Market Insights


News Article | April 24, 2017
Site: www.materialstoday.com

Specialty chemicals company Lanxess has completed its acquisition of US company Chemtura, which supplies flame retardant and lubricant additives. With a total enterprise value of €2.4 billion, Chemtura is the largest acquisition in the history of Lanxess. In addition to additives, Chemtura’s urethanes and organometallics businesses will be integrated into the Lanxess portfolio and Lanxess will will absorb 2,500 Chemtura employees at 20 sites in 11 countries. The former Chemtura businesses generate annual sales of approximately €1.5 billion. ‘The acquisition of Chemtura is another major step in our realignment process and a significant milestone in our course of growth,’ said Matthias Zachert, chairman of the board of management of Lanxess AG.’ In its new set-up and with an even more balanced portfolio, the company will be much more stable and profitable. At the same time, Chemtura considerably strengthens our presence in the North American growth region.’ Through the acquisition Lanxess has increased its footprint in North America and is is now represented at 24 production sites (previously 12) and employs approximately 2,800 staff (previously 1,500). The region’s share in global sales has increased from approximately 17% to approximately 21%. This story uses material from Lanxess, with editorial changes made by Materials Today. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent those of Elsevier.


News Article | November 7, 2016
Site: en.prnasia.com

BEACHWOOD, Ohio, Nov. 8, 2016 /PRNewswire/ -- OMNOVA Solutions Inc. (NYSE: OMN) today announced that it is moving forward with its CEO succession process, and Kevin M. McMullen is stepping down as Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President, and as a member of the Board of Directors, effective December 1, 2016, to pursue other interests. In over 16 years leading the Company, McMullen succeeded in repositioning OMNOVA as a leader in specialty chemicals and engineered surfaces including aggressive portfolio actions highlighted by the acquisition of Eliokem International. OMNOVA has experienced significant positive momentum with adjusted earnings per share up nearly 60% year-to-date through the third quarter, following 29% growth for the full year 2015. He is enthused about his future and proud of the Company's progress under his leadership. McMullen will be succeeded by Anne P. Noonan as OMNOVA's President and Chief Executive Officer, effective December 1, 2016. Ms. Noonan will also be appointed to the Company's Board of Directors. In connection with this leadership transition, the Board of Directors has determined to separate the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer roles, electing William R. Seelbach as the Company's independent, non-executive Chairman, also effective December 1, 2016. Michael J. Merriman, the Presiding Director of the OMNOVA Board of Directors, commented, "Kevin is a high-integrity leader with strong strategic and business acumen. We are thankful for Kevin's many years of leadership and his dedicated service to OMNOVA, both as Chief Executive Officer and as Chairman. He has consistently been aggressive in assessing the market and competitive environment, and taking the necessary actions to make the Company better. He leaves an organization with a well-designed growth strategy and strong leadership team in place. On behalf of the entire OMNOVA Board and the Company, I want to express our gratitude for a job well done and wish Kevin only the best. He will be missed." McMullen's initiatives over the years ensured OMNOVA's prominence and profitability despite many market-based challenges. A predominately U.S.-based company when he took charge, McMullen led OMNOVA's transformation into a global enterprise. Today, OMNOVA products are sold in over 90 countries around the world, supported by manufacturing and technology centers on three continents. He drove initiatives to dramatically expand the breadth of OMNOVA's technology to significantly enhance its position as a value-added solutions provider. McMullen, 56, joined the Company in 1996 as President of its Decorative and Building Products unit. He took over as Chief Executive Officer of the Company in 2000 and became Chairman of the Board in 2001. Prior to OMNOVA, McMullen worked for GE and McKinsey & Co. "I feel really good about where OMNOVA is today as a company," McMullen said. "Our specialty businesses are poised for above-market growth, our balance sheet has improved significantly, and we just completed a far-reaching strategic planning process that highlighted many exciting long-term opportunities. The Company is well-positioned to deliver significant long-term shareholder value." He added, "We have a strong and committed team – I will truly miss the people. But I'm relatively young and I want to pursue other interests. I think now is the time to pursue them." Noonan, 53, is currently the President of OMNOVA's Performance Chemicals business. Under her leadership, the segment has significantly improved financial results. These results were accomplished through aggressive implementation of a manufacturing footprint alignment and business model restructuring, delivering cost reductions in excess of $10 million per year while establishing a cost competitive "blueprint" for future specialty growth. Additionally, through a focus on innovation and commercial excellence, a foundation has been established to accelerate specialty growth with accomplished market-specialized talent and a reinvigorated innovation pipeline. "We are confident Anne will continue to drive enhanced value for shareholders. Anne is an accomplished executive with deep knowledge of the chemicals industry and OMNOVA," Merriman said. "She has a proven record of transformational change and improving performance through her leadership, customer focus, and emphasis on value creation. We are pleased she has agreed to lead OMNOVA, and we look forward to the contributions she will make to the Company and the Board." Noonan brings nearly 30 years of experience in the chemicals industry. Prior to joining OMNOVA in 2014, Noonan served as Senior Vice President and President of Chemtura Corporation's Industrial Engineered Products business segment with over $1 billion in revenues. During her 27 years with Chemtura and its predecessor, Great Lakes Chemical Corporation, Noonan served in roles of increasing responsibility in mergers & acquisitions, strategic business development, marketing, sales, and technology. She began her career as an Analytical Research Chemist with McNeil Specialty Chemicals Company and Squibb-Linson, Co. She earned her M.S. in organometallic chemistry and her B.S. Honors degree in chemistry from University College Dublin, Ireland. Since 2015, Noonan has been a member of the Board of Directors of CF Industries (NYSE: CF), as well as the Board of Directors of the American Chemistry Council. Noonan said, "I am excited to have the opportunity to lead OMNOVA and look forward to working with this dedicated, talented team to position the Company as a premier global, innovative specialty solutions provider. Kevin has provided a solid foundation to build upon, developing and leading an organization that is committed to its customers, employees, communities and shareholders." William R. Seelbach, 68, will succeed McMullen as OMNOVA's Chairman. Seelbach has been a non-executive member of OMNOVA's Board of Directors since 2002. Seelbach is a Senior Advisor with the Riverside Company, the world's largest private equity firm focused on investing in companies at the smaller end of the middle market, and a Senior Managing Director of Headwaters SC, a consulting firm for privately owned businesses. Previously, he was the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Ohio Aerospace Institute, a technology-focused research organization, from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he was the President of Brush Engineered Materials, Inc., now known as Materion Corporation, a manufacturer of high performance engineered materials, and held various executive roles with Brush Wellman, Inc. from 1998 to 2002. Seelbach was also the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Inverness Partners, a limited liability company engaged in acquiring and operating Midwestern manufacturing companies, and a Partner with McKinsey & Co. OMNOVA Solutions is a global innovator of performance-enhancing chemistries and surfaces used in products for a variety of commercial, industrial, and residential applications. As a strategic business-to-business supplier, OMNOVA provides The Science in Better Brands, with emulsion polymers, specialty chemicals, and functional and decorative surfaces that deliver critical performance attributes to top brand-name, end-use products sold around the world. OMNOVA's sales for the last twelve months ended August 31, 2016 were $773 million. The Company has a global workforce of approximately 1,950. Visit OMNOVA Solutions on the internet at . Statements included in this Press Release that are not historical facts are forward looking statements. These statements involve risks and uncertainties including, but not limited to the operations of the Company and other related items that are detailed in risk factors and elsewhere in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2015, subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize (or the consequences of such a development worsen), or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual outcomes may vary materially from those forecasted or expected. The Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update publicly or revise such statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.


Research and Markets has announced the addition of the "Global Chemical Seed Treatment Market Analysis & Trends - Industry Forecast to 2025" report to their offering. The Global Chemical Seed Treatment Market is poised to grow at a CAGR of around 9.3% over the next decade to reach approximately $7.5 billion by 2025. This industry report analyzes the market estimates and forecasts for all the given segments on global as well as regional levels presented in the research scope. The study provides historical market data for 2013, 2014 revenue estimations are presented for 2015 and forecasts from 2016 till 2025. The study focuses on market trends, leading players, supply chain trends, technological innovations, key developments, and future strategies. Some of the trends illustrated for the market are agronomic trends that comprise development of high quality seeds, seed companies are investing in R&D to develop target specific products, penetration and requirement of seeds such as genetically engineered (GE) corn and soybeans and developing seed treatments that can control a broad range of pathogens. On the basis of application, the market is categorised into Fungicides, Insecticides and Other chemicals. The Fungicides segment is further divided into Carbendazim, Carboxin, Fludioxonil, Mefenoxam, Tebuconazole and Thiram. Insecticides segment is sub divided into Carbofuran, Imidacloprid and Thiamethoxam. Further, the Other chemicals segment is segregated into 1,3-Dichloropropene, Abamectin, Aldicarb,Chloropicrin, Dazomet, Ethoprop, Ethylene Dibromide, Fenamiphos, Metam-Sodium, Fensulfothion, Methyl Isothiocyanate, OxamyI, Terbufos and Thionazin. Based on Crop Type, market is segregated into Oilseeds, Cereals & Grains and Other Crop Types. Oilseeds segment is subdivided into Cotton, Canola, Sunflower and Others. Cereals & Grains segment is also segregated into Corn, Rice and Wheat. The Other Crop Types segment is further divided into Sugar Beets and Turf/Forage Grasses & Alfalfa. - The report provides a detailed analysis on current and future market trends to identify the investment opportunities - Market forecasts till 2025, using estimated market values as the base numbers - Key market trends across the business segments, Regions and Countries - Key developments and strategies observed in the market - Market Dynamics such as Drivers, Restraints, Opportunities and other trends - Growth prospects among the emerging nations through 2025 - Market opportunities and recommendations for new investments 3.1.2 Seed companies are investing in R&D to develop target specific products 3.1.3 Penetration and requirement of seeds such as genetically engineered (GE) corn and soybeans 3.1.4 Developing seed treatments that can control a broad range of pathogens 4 Chemical Seed Treatment Market, By Application 4.1 Fungicides 4.1.1.1 Carbendazim 4.1.1.2 Carboxin 4.1.1.3 Fludioxonil 4.1.1.4 Mefenoxam 4.1.1.5 Tebuconazole 4.1.1.6 Thiram 4.2 Insecticides 4.2.1.1 Carbofuran 4.2.1.2 Imidacloprid 4.2.1.3 Thiamethoxam 4.3 Other chemicals 4.3.1.1 1,3-Dichloropropene 4.3.1.2 Abamectin 4.3.1.3 Aldicarb 4.3.1.4 Chloropicrin 4.3.1.5 Dazomet 4.3.1.6 Ethoprop 4.3.1.7 Ethylene Dibromide 4.3.1.8 Fenamiphos 4.3.1.9 Metam-Sodium 4.3.1.10 Fensulfothion 4.3.1.11 Methyl Isothiocyanate 4.3.1.12 OxamyI 4.3.1.13 Terbufos 4.3.1.14 Thionazin 5 Chemical Seed Treatment Market, By Crop Type 5.1 Oilseeds 5.1.1.1 Cotton 5.1.1.2 Canola 5.1.1.3 Sunflower 5.1.1.4 Others 5.2 Cereals & Grains 5.2.1.1 Corn 5.2.1.2 Rice 5.2.1.3 Wheat 5.3 Other Crop Types 5.3.1.1 Sugar Beets 5.3.1.2 Turf/Forage Grasses & Alfalfa 6 Chemical Seed Treatment Market, By Technique 6.1 Coating 6.2 Dressing 6.3 Pelleting 6.3.1 Pelleting Market Forecast to 2025 (US$ MN) 7 Chemical Seed Treatment Market, By Geography 8 Key Player Activities 8.1 Acquisitions & Mergers 8.2 Agreements, Partnerships, Collaborations and Joint Ventures 8.3 Product Launch & Expansions 8.4 Other Activities 9 Leading Companies 9.1 Adama Agricultural Solutions Ltd (Formerly Makhteshim Agan Industries Ltd) 9.2 Advanced Biological Marketing Inc 9.3 BASF SE 9.4 Bayer Cropscience Ag 9.5 Chemtura Agrosolutions 9.6 Dupont 9.7 Incotec Group Bv 9.8 Verdesian Life Sciences 9.9 Monsanto Company 9.10 Novozymes A/S 9.11 Nufarm Ltd 9.12 Syngenta International Ag 9.13 BioWorks Inc, 9.14 Valent USA Corp 9.15 Germains Seed Technology 9.16 Precision Laboratories Llc 9.17 Plant Health Care 9.18 BrettYoung Limited 9.19 Wolf Trax Inc 9.20 Sumitomo Chemical Company Limited 9.21 FMC Corporation 9.22 WinField Solutions, LLC 9.23 Arysta Life Science Limited For more information about this report visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/q655md/global_chemical


News Article | February 22, 2017
Site: globenewswire.com

Fourth Quarter 2016 GAAP net earnings of $0.34 per diluted share compared to $0.96 for the fourth quarter of 2015 Fourth Quarter 2016 Non-GAAP net earnings of $0.34 per diluted share compared to $0.44 for the fourth quarter of 2015 Year ended December 31, 2016 GAAP net loss of $0.24 per diluted share compared to net earnings of $1.98 for the year ended December 31, 2015 Year ended December 31, 2016 Non-GAAP net earnings of $1.72 per diluted share compared to $1.47 for the year ended December 31, 2015 PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 22, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Chemtura Corporation (NYSE:CHMT) (Euronext Paris:CHMT) (the “Company,” “Chemtura,” “We,” “Us” or “Our”) today announced financial results for the fourth quarter and year ended December 31, 2016.  The Company also filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.  For the fourth quarter of 2016, Chemtura reported net sales of $385 million and net earnings on a GAAP basis of $22 million, or $0.34 per diluted share.  Net earnings on a Non-GAAP basis were $22 million, or $0.34 per diluted share.  For the year ended December 31, 2016, Chemtura reported net sales of $1,654 million and a net loss on a GAAP basis of $15 million, or $0.24 per diluted share.  Net earnings on a Non-GAAP basis were $111 million, or $1.72 per diluted share. The discussion below includes financial information on both a GAAP and non-GAAP basis.  Later in this release, we explain our Non-GAAP metrics including how each is calculated, why we use the specific metric and the internal controls around our Non-GAAP metrics.  We have provided reconciliations of our GAAP financial information to our Non-GAAP financial metrics in the supplemental schedules attached to this release.  The use of Non-GAAP metrics is not a substitute for GAAP measures and should not be considered as such. The following is a summary of the unaudited financial results on a GAAP and Non-GAAP basis (a description of our Non-GAAP metrics appears later in this release): “In the fourth quarter, we focused on finishing the year strong and on progressing towards closing the Lanxess transaction,” said Craig Rogerson, Chemtura's Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer.  “We are pleased that our shareholders have overwhelmingly approved the merger with Lanxess and that we have already received a number of regulatory clearances.  The post-closing integration planning is on course and our respective organizations are well positioned to create a stronger, more diverse and higher performing specialty chemical company.” Mr. Rogerson continued, “In the fourth quarter, we were able to continue our strong 2016 performance.  Fourth quarter operating income increased 14% versus the prior year on overall lower revenue.  Sequentially, revenue and operating income were lower for our industrial businesses, which is often the case in the last quarter of the year.  For the full year, excluding the impact of the pension settlement charge incurred earlier in the year and the expenses related to the merger and post-closing integration planning, 2016 operating income increased 36% over our 2015 results.” “Our IEP Segment posted higher fourth quarter revenue and operating income compared to the fourth quarter of 2015,” said Mr. Rogerson.  “Higher prices for bromine-based products and increased sales of our polymer co-catalyst products led the way for IEP’s year-over-year improvements.  Also, in 2015, IEP’s fourth quarter performance was dragged down by charges related to exiting a product line, which did not repeat in the fourth quarter of 2016.  Sequentially, revenue and operating income were lower compared to the third quarter of 2016 due in part to lower bromine sales in the U.S., lower sales of clear brine fluids and seasonally lower fumigant sales.  It is worth noting that sales of flame retardants, such as tetrabrom, into certain electronic applications increased sequentially.” “Our IPP Segment reported lower fourth quarter sales and operating income compared to prior year and sequentially.  Year-over-year declines in IPP sales and operating income are attributable to unfavorable product mix and lower demand across many of our IPP product lines.  We also saw lower prices in certain IPP products compared to last year, as we passed along lower raw material costs to certain of our customers.  In addition, sales prices for urethanes products used in mining and oil and gas applications were lower in the fourth quarter of 2016 compared to last year due to continued weakness in those industries, although we did experience volume growth from new urethane applications in Asia.  Sequential declines in IPP sales and operating income were predominately due to year-end order timing, unfavorable product mix and higher raw material and manufacturing costs.” “For the calendar year of 2016, we delivered on our commitment to increase operating profitability,” observed Mr. Rogerson.  “Excluding the first quarter pension settlement charge resulting from the pension annuity transaction and merger and integration costs, 2016 operating profit of $221 million increased by $59 million, or 36% compared to 2015 calendar year operating profit of $162 million.  The improvement was less visible in our earnings per share due to the loss from the pension settlement charge, the merger and integration expenses and the 2015 tax benefit from certain tax credits and the release of valuation allowance which resulted in a lower than normal tax rate for the prior year.” Mr. Rogerson concluded, “Looking ahead, we will continue to work with our Lanxess colleagues to ensure a smooth transition and integration into the Lanxess organization post-closing.  We expect that the transaction will close by the middle of 2017.  We will also continue to execute on our business plan.” On February 1, 2017, Chemtura's stockholders voted to approve and adopt the agreement and plan of merger (the "Merger Agreement") we entered into on September 25, 2016 with Lanxess Deutschland GmbH, a limited liability company under the laws of Germany ("Lanxess"), and LANXESS Additives Inc., a Delaware corporation and an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Lanxess ("Merger Subsidiary").  The merger remains subject to customary closing conditions.  Assuming timely satisfaction of the remaining closing conditions, we currently expect the merger to close by mid-2017. See tables that follow for a quantitative summary of the components of change by segment between the fourth quarter of 2016 and the fourth quarter of 2015 (“year-over-year”) and compared to the third quarter of 2016 (“sequential”). Our IPP segment delivered lower net sales and lower operating income both year-over-year and sequentially. Year-over-year, the reduction in net sales was primarily the result of lower volume and lower sales prices.  During 2016, we continued to pass along the benefit of lower raw material costs to certain of our customers where required by contract.  Lower volume and unfavorable product mix in our petroleum additive products, particularly in synthetic lubricants, base stocks and detergents, were partially offset by increased sales of our lower priced intermediate products.  New application demand for our urethane products, particularly in Asia, offset the continued low demand for our urethane products used in mining and oil and gas applications that we experienced all year.  Sequentially, the primary drivers of the decline in net sales were lower volumes and unfavorable product mix.  In the third quarter of 2016, we benefited from additional volume for our inhibitor products due to a temporary shutdown of an Asian competitor's plant.  With production restored, demand returned to normal levels in the fourth quarter, although seasonally lower.  Sales prices showed a modest increase over the previous quarter. Operating income year-over-year benefited from favorable raw material and distribution costs which were offset by the lower volume and unfavorable product mix and higher costs for manufacturing, inventory adjustments and selling, general and administrative ("SG&A").  Sequentially, the impact of lower net sales, coupled with higher costs for raw material, manufacturing and inventory adjustments in the fourth quarter, reduced operating income. Our IEP segment reported an improvement in year-over-year net sales and operating income.  On a sequential basis, our IEP segment reported lower net sales and lower operating income. Year-over-year, the increase in net sales was primarily driven by higher sales prices in our Emerald Innovation 3000TM products, as well as in our bromine and bromine-based derivative products.  We saw a significant improvement in volume for our organometallic polymerization co-catalysts and tin specialty products due to increased customer demand, which was offset in part by slower demand for our Emerald Innovation 3000TM product and the reduced demand for our clear brine fluids used in the drilling of deep offshore oil and gas wells that we have experienced all year.  Sequentially, the benefit of increases in sales prices for bromine and bromine-based derivatives and tin specialty products were partly offset by some competitive reductions in sales prices for certain brominated flame retardant products.  Sales volumes benefited from increased demand for tetrabrom which was completely offset by the reduced demand for clear brine fluids, fumigants and bromine and bromine-based derivative products. Operating income on a year-over-year basis benefited from the higher sales prices and the volume improvement in our organometallic products.  Lower raw material costs in certain products were offset by the higher cost of tin, which in many cases we were able to pass along to our customers under formula-based pricing.  Unfavorable manufacturing and absorption variances in 2016 were offset by the absence of a charge we recorded in the fourth quarter of 2015 related to the discontinuance of a product.  Sequentially, operating income saw slightly higher costs in all categories, offset in part by increased sales prices. Our general corporate expense decreased slightly on a year-over-year basis, with some increase in our management incentive accruals offset by favorable pension and environmental accruals and lower charges for amortization.  Sequentially, general corporate expense remained relatively flat. During the fourth and third quarters of 2016, we recorded $2 million and $11 million, respectively, of merger and integration costs, which primarily are comprised of legal and other fees associated with the signing of the Merger Agreement with Lanxess and the charge related to the Addivant preferred stock noted below. Contemporaneous with the execution of the Merger Agreement, we entered into an agreement with SK Blue Holdings, Ltd., and Addivant USA Holdings Corp (collectively, "Addivant") that committed us to surrender our shares of Addivant preferred stock to Addivant along with a cash payment of $1 million in exchange for a modification of a non-compete agreement entered into in conjunction with the sale of our antioxidants business to Addivant in 2013.  Reflecting the terms of this agreement, in the third quarter of 2016, we took a charge of $5 million which is included in the merger and integration costs described above.  The agreement with Addivant also provided for certain other modifications to our continuing supply agreements with Addivant that are contingent upon the completion of the Merger. The Agrochemical Manufacturing segment reported lower net sales but operating income was relatively flat both year-over-year and sequentially. The decrease in net sales was attributable to the change from a supply agreement to a tolling agreement in Brazil implemented earlier in 2016 (which reduced both net sales and cost of sales with no impact on operating profit).  We note that the results include net sales and operating profit related to the non-cash amortization, net of accretion, of a below-market contract obligation that is related to our supply agreements.  These amounts were $9 million, $9 million and $10 million in the fourth quarter of 2016, the fourth quarter of 2015 and the third quarter of 2016, respectively. Income tax expense was $14 million in the fourth quarter of 2016 compared with a benefit of $27 million in the fourth quarter of 2015 and expense of $17 million in the third quarter of 2016.  In the fourth quarter of 2015, we released $19 million of certain remaining U.S. federal and state tax valuation allowances as a result of our anticipated improvement in profitability in the U.S. and additional tax benefits were realized from increased utilization of foreign tax credit carrybacks to 2014 and the use of foreign net operating losses which became available due to a change in a foreign country's tax law.  As a result, our 2015 effective tax rate was 11%.  In 2016, our effective tax rate for the year was significantly increased by the tax treatment of the pension settlement accounting arising from the pension annuity transaction in the first quarter of 2016. For purposes of calculating our Non-GAAP Earnings From Continuing Operations, we have applied a Non-GAAP tax rate of 28%.  The non-GAAP rate reflects adjustments to our U.S. GAAP provision to exclude the tax effects of certain types of income and expense as described in our Non-GAAP Measures policy below. In the first quarter of 2015, we completed an evaluation based upon the forecast for the full year and we estimated our Non-GAAP tax rate to be 28%.  This rate was subject to fluctuations each quarter due to changes in our forecasted operating results of our continuing businesses, changes in the mix of income between U.S. and foreign jurisdictions and discrete items that are recorded in the periods in which they occur.  As 2015 progressed, we revised down our Non-GAAP rate for the inclusion of credits, deductions and return to provision adjustments but excluded those that directly related to the divestiture of Chemtura AgroSolutions.  In the fourth quarter of 2015, the Non-GAAP tax rate was further reduced for additional tax benefits we obtained.  Based on these adjustments to the effective rate, our Non-GAAP tax rate for the full year of 2015 was 13%.  Due to the reduction of the Non-GAAP tax rate from that used for the third quarter ended September 30, 2015, the resulting Non-GAAP tax provision for the fourth quarter of 2015 was lower than the full year rate. If we exclude the benefit of the adjustments to our Non-GAAP rate during 2015 for the items discussed above, our estimated Non-GAAP tax rate in 2015 was 28%.  In the first quarter of 2016, we again estimated our Non-GAAP tax rate at 28%.  Each quarter we evaluated whether this estimate should be revised.  As the 2015 adjustments did not reoccur in 2016, our Non-GAAP tax rate for 2016 remained at 28% during the year and the Non-GAAP tax rate for the full year of 2016 was essentially the same as the 28% estimated rate applied during the year. Cash income taxes paid (net of refunds) for the fourth quarter of 2016, the fourth quarter of 2015 and the third quarter of 2016 were $7 million, $4 million and $13 million, respectively. Copies of this release will be available on the Investor Relations section of our website at www.chemtura.com.  We will host a teleconference to review these results at 9:00 a.m. (EST) on Thursday, February 23, 2017.  Interested parties are asked to dial in approximately 10 minutes prior to the start time.  The call-in number for U.S. based participants is (877) 494-3128 and for all other participants is (404) 665-9523.  The conference ID code is 48493850. Replay of the call will be available for thirty days, starting at 12 p.m. (EST) on Thursday, February 23, 2017.  To access the replay, call toll-free (855) 859-2056, (800) 585-8367, or (404) 537-3406, and enter access code 48493850.  An audio webcast of the call can be accessed via the link below during the time of the call: Chemtura Corporation, with 2016 net sales of $1.7 billion, is a global manufacturer and marketer of specialty chemicals.  Additional information concerning us is available at www.chemtura.com. Certain information presented in this press release and in the attached financial tables includes financial measures that are not calculated or presented in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States (“GAAP”). We refer to those financial measures as “Non-GAAP”.  While GAAP provides a prescribed format for presenting financial information, internally we have developed and use other financial metrics and measures to make resource allocation decisions, evaluate our underlying performance, compare that performance to peer companies, identify operating trends, determine performance-based compensation, and, among other factors, predict future performance and cash inflows and outflows.  Understanding the Non-GAAP financial measures we use to manage our business and resources provides our investors with insights that cannot be obtained by a review of the GAAP based measures alone.  Many of the Non-GAAP financial measures we use in managing our business can be calculated by investors and other users of our financial statements; however, we provide this information to the public to ensure there are not multiple interpretations of the calculation of any such measure.  To assist our investors in understanding the differences between our GAAP and Non-GAAP measures, we have provided a reconciliation between these presentations in the attached financial tables. Our Non-GAAP Financial Metrics and policies are posted on our website at www.Chemtura.com so that they can be easily referenced by our investors. We use each of the following Non-GAAP measures to provide investors and other users of our financial statements with additional information to aid their understanding of our primary business performance trends as well as our current and future potential cash inflows and outflows: Non-GAAP Net Sales - Included in our presentation of GAAP Net Sales is the revenue accretion and amortization of a below market contract liability related to the supply agreements resulting from the sale of our Chemtura AgroSolutions business.  We excluded these revenues as the accretion and amortization do not generate current or future cash flows. We also exclude the benefit of this accretion and amortization in computing Non-GAAP profitability measures. Non-GAAP Adjusted EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization) -  EBITDA is a financial measure frequently used by investors and others to understand a company’s profitability as well as its ability to meet debt service obligations, make investments and compare performance and valuation to other companies.  This measure excludes cash and non-cash income or charges that exist in a company’s GAAP presentation that do not necessarily represent current or future cash inflows or outflows of business operations.  For example, depreciation and amortization are charges that reduce a company’s net income, but reflect a historic rather than current use of cash and share-based compensation expense is a charge where there is no current use of cash.  This pre-tax measure also excludes interest expense as well as other miscellaneous income and expense, such as realized and unrealized foreign exchange gains and loss, that we have concluded are not representative of current performance of our operating businesses.  Our calculation begins with GAAP Net Earnings (Loss) from which we exclude GAAP income tax expense or benefit, GAAP interest expense, GAAP depreciation and amortization, GAAP other income or expense, the non-cash share-based compensation expense and certain other income and charges as listed in the description of our Non-GAAP policy below.  It is also one of the performance measures used to determine the amount, if any, of a payout under our management incentive plans. Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes - As defined by GAAP, Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Tax is a sub-total that provides information regarding an entity’s results of continuing operations excluding any amounts related specifically to income taxes.  It is calculated by taking Net Earnings (Loss) and excluding any income or loss associated with discontinued operations and any income tax expense.  To calculate Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes, we start with GAAP Net Earnings (Loss) and exclude any results related to discontinued operations, income tax expense and certain other income and charges as listed in the description of our Non-GAAP policy below.  This sub-total is necessary when computing income tax expense on an interim basis (as described below) for both GAAP and Non-GAAP purposes. Non-GAAP Income Tax Expense / Benefit - The calculation of our GAAP income tax expense or benefit in any interim period is based upon an estimate of our effective tax rate for the annual period multiplied by our interim GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes, adjusted for discrete items if required.  The calculation of our Non-GAAP Income Tax Expense is based on the same principles as our GAAP income tax expense; however, we exclude from the calculation any tax associated with items that have been excluded, or are projected to be excluded during the calendar year, in our Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes, which are listed in the description of our Non-GAAP policy below.  We also exclude certain tax benefits and expenses as described in our Non-GAAP policy below.  Application of the GAAP tax rate to our Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes would render an income tax expense that does not correctly reflect the tax associated with the pre-tax adjustments we make in our Non-GAAP performance measures.  The computation of an effective tax rate reflecting the tax effect of our pre-tax Non-GAAP adjustments permits the calculation of after tax Non-GAAP performance measures and provides additional insights as to the underlying global tax rate for our primary business operations.  At the end of the calendar year, we prepare a tax provision based on Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes, excluding certain tax benefits and expenses as described in our Non-GAAP policy below, in order to compute Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations (defined below) for the fourth quarter and calendar year. Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations -  This measure is determined by applying the Non-GAAP Effective Tax Rate for interim periods, or for the calendar year, a tax provision, to our Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes and reducing the Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes by that amount.  The resulting measure is termed Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations.  This metric is intended to provide users of the financial statements with an after tax profitability measure consistent with our pre-tax Non-GAAP measure and is required to compute Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) Per Share from Continuing Operations. Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) Per Share from Continuing Operations - To calculate this Non-GAAP measure, we divide our Basic and Diluted Weighted Average Shares into our Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations.  To determine our Basic and Diluted Weighted Average Shares, we utilize GAAP principles under both presentations.  In many periods, the GAAP and Non-GAAP Basis and Weighted Average Shares are the same; however, should either the GAAP or Non-GAAP Earnings (Loss) from Continuing Operations be anti-dilutive, the Diluted Weighted Averages Shares may differ between the two presentations.  This measure is used as one of the criteria to determine the amount, if any, of a payout under our management incentive plans. Free Cash Flow - We define Free Cash Flow as Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities less GAAP capital expenditures and investments in intangible assets as presented in our GAAP Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.  It is intended to provide users of our financial statements an indication of cash flows that are generated by or used in our primary business operations alone.  We caution investors that this measure excludes Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities that can include mandatory debt service obligations.  It will also exclude investments such as acquisitions or cash proceeds from divestitures.  It includes cash contributions to pension plans and post-retirement benefit obligations as these are included in Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities.  This measure therefore cannot be used to understand changes in cash or in total indebtedness in any reporting period. Net Debt - The term Net Debt is a Non-GAAP measure that is calculated from information in our GAAP presentation.  We add Short-term Borrowings and Long-term Debt (combined “Total Debt”) less Cash and cash equivalents, all as presented on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. This metric provides users of our financial statements a view of our indebtedness were we to use all our cash and cash equivalents on hand to repay debt. To ensure consistency in the presentation of these Non-GAAP measures, we have developed an internal accounting policy which specifies what types of income or expense are considered to be adjustments to our GAAP financial results and metrics.  In practice, this policy is reviewed annually and approved by our Disclosure Committee and the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.  Our Non-GAAP financial measures have not changed from the prior year, although in some years we do not have certain transactions. In accordance with our Non-GAAP accounting policy, we adjust our pre-tax GAAP information for the following items: Although we utilize Non-GAAP financial measures internally to monitor and analyze our performance, determine compensation under our management incentive plans and predict future performance, investors should not consider them to be a substitute for financial measures prepared in accordance with GAAP.  In addition, these Non-GAAP financial measures may be calculated differently from similarly titled Non-GAAP financial measures utilized by other companies and, therefore, should not be used in a comparison of our performance relative to other companies without further review of how others calculate these measures. This earnings press release contains forward-looking statements based on management’s current expectations, estimates and projections.  All statements that address expectations or projections about the future, including our actions that will drive earnings growth, demand for our products and expectations for growth, are forward-looking statements.  These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties, potentially inaccurate assumptions and other factors, some of which are beyond our control and difficult to predict.  If known or unknown risks materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove inaccurate, our actual results could differ materially from past results and from those expressed in forward-looking statements.  Important factors that could cause our results to differ materially from those expressed in forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, economic, business, competitive, political, regulatory, legal and governmental conditions in the countries and regions in which we operate.  These factors and others are discussed more fully in the reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, particularly our latest annual report on Form 10-K.  We assume no obligation to provide revisions to any forward-looking statements should circumstances change, except as otherwise required by securities and other applicable laws.


News Article | November 16, 2016
Site: www.newsmaker.com.au

MarketStudyReport.com adds “Global Phosphate Ester Market by Manufacturers, Regions, Type and Application, Forecast to 2021” new report to its research database. The report spread across 111 pages with table and figures in it. Phosphate Ester, is an ester derived from an alcohol and phosphoric acid. Technology can be also called as organophosphate because these molecules have a phosphate group bonded to carbon. Phosphate Ester is widely used in pesticides, lubricants, surfactants, flame retardants. Scope of the Report: This report focuses on the Phosphate Ester in Global market, especially in North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East and Africa. This report categorizes the market based on manufacturers, regions, type and application. Market Segment by Manufacturers, this report covers Chemtura Dow ExxonMobil Akzo Nobel Elementis Specialties Solvay Ashland IsleChem BASF Custom Synthesis Croda Stepan Eastman Colonial Chemical Clariant Lanxess Castrol LimTechnologyed Kao Ajinomoto Fortune Zhenxing Ankang Xinhang Market Segment by Regions, regional analysis covers North America (USA, Canada and Mexico) Europe (Germany, France, UK, Russia and Technologyaly) Asia-Pacific (China, Japan, Korea, India and Southeast Asia) South America, Middle East and Africa Market Segment by Type, covers Alkyl Phosphate Esters Aryl phosphate easters Others Monophosphate Market Segment by Applications, can be divided into Flame Retardants Lubricants Cleaning Products Browse full table of contents and data tables at https://www.marketstudyreport.com/reports/global-phosphate-ester-market-by-manufacturers-regions-type-and-application-forecast-to-2021/ There are 13 Chapters to deeply display the global Phosphate Ester market. Chapter 1, to describe Phosphate Ester Introduction, product scope, market overview, market opportunTechnologyies, market risk, market driving force; Chapter 2, to analyze the top manufacturers of Phosphate Ester, wTechnologyh sales, revenue, and price of Phosphate Ester, in 2015 and 2016; Chapter 3, to display the competTechnologyive sTechnologyuation among the top manufacturers, wTechnologyh sales, revenue and market share in 2015 and 2016; Chapter 4, to show the global market by regions, wTechnologyh sales, revenue and market share of Phosphate Ester, for each region, from 2011 to 2016; Chapter 5, 6, 7 and 8, to analyze the key regions, wTechnologyh sales, revenue and market share by key countries in these regions; Chapter 9 and 10, to show the market by type and application, wTechnologyh sales market share and growth rate by type, application, from 2011 to 2016; Chapter 11, Phosphate Ester market forecast, by regions, type and application, wTechnologyh sales and revenue, from 2016 to 2021; Chapter 12 and 13, to describe Phosphate Ester sales channel, distributors, traders, dealers, appendix and data source. To receive personalized assistance write to us @ [email protected] with the report title in the subject line along with your questions or call us at +1 866-764-2150


Seed Treatment Market By Function (Crop Protection Chemicals, and Seed Enhancement), By Type (Chemical, Physical, and Biological), and By Crop Type (Corn, Soybean, Cotton, Canola, and Others): Global Industry Perspective, Comprehensive Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Segment, Trends and Forecast 2014 – 2020 The report covers forecast and analysis for the seed treatment market on a global and regional level. The study provides historic data of 2014 along with a forecast from 2015 to 2020 based on revenue (USD million). The study includes drivers and restraints for the seed treatment market along with the impact they have on the demand over the forecast period. Additionally, the report includes the study of the opportunities available in the seed treatment market on a global level. In order to give the users of this report a comprehensive view on the seed treatment market, we have included a detailed value chain analysis. To understand the competitive landscape in the market, an analysis of Porter’s Five Forces model for the seed treatment market has also been included. The study encompasses a market attractiveness analysis, wherein function, type, and crop type segments are benchmarked based on their market size, growth rate and general attractiveness. The study provides a decisive view on the seed treatment market by segmenting the market based on applications. All the application segments have been analyzed based on present and future trends and the market is estimated from 2014 to 2020. Key function segments covered under this study includes crop protection chemicals, and seed enhancement. Key types segments covered under this study includes chemical, physical, and biological. Key crop type segments covered under this study includes corn, soybean, cotton, canola, and others. The regional segmentation includes the current and forecast demand for North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America and Middle East and Africa with its further bifurcation into major countries including U.S. Germany, France, UK, China, Japan, India and Brazil. This segmentation includes demand for seed treatment based on individual applications in all the regions and countries. The report also includes detailed profiles of end players such as Syngenta, Bayer CropScience, Monsanto, BASF, Chemtura, Nufarm, DuPont, Becker Underwood, Wolf Trax Incorporation, Plant Health Care, Valent U.S.A. Corporation, Precision Laboratories Incorporation, Sumitomo Chemical Company Limited, Novozymes A/S, Advanced Biological Marketing, Morflora, ASTEC Global, Incotec Group BV, Cibus Global, Germains Seed Technology, Ceres Inc. and Brettyoung Limited. The detailed description of players includes parameters such as company overview, financial overview, business strategies and recent developments of the company. The report segments the global seed treatment market as:


News Article | December 1, 2016
Site: www.newsmaker.com.au

This report studies Impact Modifier in Global market, especially in North America, Europe, China, Japan, Southeast Asia and India, focuses on top manufacturers in global market, with capacity, production, price, revenue and market share for each manufacturer, covering  Dupont  Ruifengchemical  Kaneka  Arkema  LG Chem  Akdeniz Kimya  Addivant  SAFIC-ALCAN  Akzo Nobel N.V.  BASF SE  Chemtura  Clariant AG  Evonik Industries AG  Lanxess AG  The DOW Chemical Company Market Segment by Regions, this report splits Global into several key Regions, with production, consumption, revenue, market share and growth rate of Impact Modifier in these regions, from 2011 to 2021 (forecast), like  North America  Europe  China  Japan  Southeast Asia  India Split by product type, with production, revenue, price, market share and growth rate of each type, can be divided into  ABS  MBS  AIM  ASA  EPDM  TPE  CPE  Other Split by application, this report focuses on consumption, market share and growth rate of Impact Modifier in each application, can be divided into  PVC  Nylon  PTB  Engineering Plastics  Others Global Impact Modifier Market Research Report 2016  1 Impact Modifier Market Overview  1.1 Product Overview and Scope of Impact Modifier  1.2 Impact Modifier Segment by Type  1.2.1 Global Production Market Share of Impact Modifier by Type in 2015  1.2.2 ABS  1.2.3 MBS  1.2.4 AIM  1.2.5 ASA  1.2.6 EPDM  1.2.7 TPE  1.2.8 CPE  1.2.9 Other  1.3 Impact Modifier Segment by Application  1.3.1 Impact Modifier Consumption Market Share by Application in 2015  1.3.2 PVC  1.3.3 Nylon  1.3.4 PTB  1.3.5 Engineering Plastics  1.3.6 Others  1.4 Impact Modifier Market by Region  1.4.1 North America Status and Prospect (2011-2021)  1.4.2 Europe Status and Prospect (2011-2021)  1.4.3 China Status and Prospect (2011-2021)  1.4.4 Japan Status and Prospect (2011-2021)  1.4.5 Southeast Asia Status and Prospect (2011-2021)  1.4.6 India Status and Prospect (2011-2021)  1.5 Global Market Size (Value) of Impact Modifier (2011-2021) 7 Global Impact Modifier Manufacturers Profiles/Analysis  7.1 Dupont  7.1.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.1.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.1.2.1 Type I  7.1.2.2 Type II  7.1.3 Dupont Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.1.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.2 Ruifengchemical  7.2.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.2.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.2.2.1 Type I  7.2.2.2 Type II  7.2.3 Ruifengchemical Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.2.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.3 Kaneka  7.3.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.3.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.3.2.1 Type I  7.3.2.2 Type II  7.3.3 Kaneka Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.3.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.4 Arkema  7.4.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.4.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.4.2.1 Type I  7.4.2.2 Type II  7.4.3 Arkema Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.4.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.5 LG Chem  7.5.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.5.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.5.2.1 Type I  7.5.2.2 Type II  7.5.3 LG Chem Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.5.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.6 Akdeniz Kimya  7.6.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.6.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.6.2.1 Type I  7.6.2.2 Type II  7.6.3 Akdeniz Kimya Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.6.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.7 Addivant  7.7.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.7.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.7.2.1 Type I  7.7.2.2 Type II  7.7.3 Addivant Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.7.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.8 SAFIC-ALCAN  7.8.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.8.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.8.2.1 Type I  7.8.2.2 Type II  7.8.3 SAFIC-ALCAN Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.8.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.9 Akzo Nobel N.V.  7.9.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.9.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.9.2.1 Type I  7.9.2.2 Type II  7.9.3 Akzo Nobel N.V. Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.9.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.10 BASF SE  7.10.1 Company Basic Information, Manufacturing Base and Its Competitors  7.10.2 Impact Modifier Product Type, Application and Specification  7.10.2.1 Type I  7.10.2.2 Type II  7.10.3 BASF SE Impact Modifier Capacity, Production, Revenue, Price and Gross Margin (2015 and 2016)  7.10.4 Main Business/Business Overview  7.11 Chemtura  7.12 Clariant AG  7.13 Evonik Industries AG  7.14 Lanxess AG  7.15 The DOW Chemical Company


News Article | September 26, 2016
Site: cen.acs.org

German specialty chemical producer Lanxess has agreed to buy Philadelphia-based Chemtura, a maker of lubricant additives, plastics flame retardants, urethanes, and organometallics, in a cash deal worth roughly $2.5 billion. The $33.50 per share Lanxess will pay represents an 18.9% premium over Chemtura’s stock price on Sept. 23, the business day before the deal was announced. The acquisition, the largest in Lanxess’s history, was driven by the company’s desire to grow its additives business and . . .


News Article | February 1, 2017
Site: globenewswire.com

PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 01, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Chemtura Corporation (NYSE:CHMT) (Euronext Paris:CHMT) today announced that at a special meeting of stockholders held today, Chemtura stockholders voted to approve and adopt the previously announced merger agreement under which LANXESS Deutschland GmbH, a wholly owned subsidiary of LANXESS AG (FRA:LXS), will acquire all of the outstanding shares of Chemtura common stock for $33.50 per share in cash, without interest.  Approximately 99.88% percent of the votes cast at the special meeting were in favor of the approval and adoption of the merger agreement, representing approximately 81.77% percent of Chemtura’s outstanding common stock as of December 23, 2016, the record date for the special meeting. Craig A. Rogerson, President and Chief Executive Officer of Chemtura and Chairman of the Chemtura Board of Directors, said, “We are pleased that our stockholders recognize the immediate and substantial value of this compelling transaction.  We thank our stockholders for their support and look forward to a bright future ahead as part of LANXESS.” Subject to satisfaction or waiver of the remaining customary closing conditions in the merger agreement, the transaction is expected to close in mid-2017, at which time Chemtura will cease to be traded on the NYSE and Euronext Paris. About Chemtura Chemtura Corporation, with 2015 sales of $1.7 billion, is a global manufacturer and marketer of specialty chemicals. Additional information concerning Chemtura is available at www.chemtura.com.

Loading Chemtura collaborators
Loading Chemtura collaborators