DangCem launches all-out attack on ‘rebaggers’

In a bid to tackle ‘re-bagging,’ which is one of the biggest threats in the cement industry, Dangote Cement (DangCem), the largest manufacturer of the product in the country, has set out an all-out attack on perpetrators.

‘Re-bagging’ is a term used to describe an activity of emptying the original contents of a bag and then refilling it with a different adulterated product or commodity. In the cement industry, for instance, unscrupulous elements buy original cement brands, empty the contents and mix them with sand before refilling the bag.

Another method adopted by the bad elements is to buy cake cement from shops, grind it, mix it with sand and then put the adulterated commodity into a bag belonging to a reputable cement manufacturer. The major drive of perpetrators of this act is pecuniary gain, but cement makers end up bearing the brunt as customers/consumers often believe the product is from the original source. The danger is that in the case of damage associated with the product, consumers often attribute it to the firm whose bag has been used for the product.

“There are different forms of what these people are doing. We have an extensive team, spearheaded by a former commissioner of police, who is in our employment, exclusively on this,’’ Devakumar V.G Edwin, group managing director/CEO, DangCem plc, told Real Sector Watch in an exclusive interview.

According to Edwin, his team is working hard to checkmate stealing of bags by unscrupulous people from factories, which facilitate this business, adding that with the customer feedback introduced by the company, ‘rebaggers’ must know their time is up.

“We have even heard people say they sell Dangote Cement between N900 and N1000. What happens is that our customers often call us and inform us of the situation. Sometimes, they tell us we are cheating them because of the price someone tells them elsewhere. Once we get the information, we launch into action,’’ Edwin added.

He further said that DangCem was not seeking monopoly and was not a monopolist because it got no protection from anywhere, adding that it was not the fault of the company that it was investing.