About B&E International

Five decades of mining and quarrying excellence, powered by innovation and trusted partnerships across Africa.

Our Story​

B&E International originated in 1972 as a specialized drilling and blasting entity known as Blasting & Excavating. Since those early beginnings, we have evolved into an integrated mineral processing leader and a trusted partner within the mining and infrastructure landscape of Africa. What began as a focused operation has matured into a multidisciplinary business capable of delivering full-scale crushing and engineering solutions across the region.

Over the decades, our footprint has expanded throughout Southern Africa. We have supported some of the continent’s most significant mining and construction projects by maintaining a consistent commitment to technical excellence and reliability. This growth is a direct result of our ability to innovate and adapt in every environment where we operate.

Our strength lies in combining deep industry knowledge with hands-on experience to provide practical and results-driven solutions. Based in South Africa we are Proudly African.

Key Achievements:

Our Values​

Our culture is built on values that have guided our growth for more than five decades. They shape how we work, how we lead, and how we serve our clients and communities.

Safety First

Committed to zero harm through rigorous safety protocols and a culture of vigilance.

Precision Quality

Delivering engineered excellence and technical precision in every ton produced.

Integrity

Building lasting partnerships based on transparency, ethical conduct, and mutual respect.

Partnership

Aligning our success with our clients through flexible delivery models and reliable results.

Adaptation

We evolve with technology, industry shifts, and to environmental demands.

Our Leadership Team

Guided by experience. Driven by excellence.

Chris Weideman

Managing Director

Royden Webster​

Operations Director

Kenneth Bason

Plant & Engineering Director

Petrus Strydom

Financial Director

Grant Cupido

Operations Director

Shaltoe Watkins

Director Namibia

From Blasting Roots to Integrated Solutions

How we expanded from a single service provider into a comprehensive partner delivering end to end mining and operational solutions.

1972 | The Foundation

Established as Blasting and Excavating in Port Elizabeth specializing in professional drilling and blasting services.

1976 | Mobile Crushing Entry

Began mobile crushing operations as Construction Quarries Ltd through a joint venture with LTA.

1998 | B&E Interanational Branding

Reflecting significant growth and expansion throughout the African continent.

2008 | Raubex Group Acquisition

Joined the Raubex Group to provide the financial strength and infrastructure required for large scale African projects.

2013 | Skills Development

The B&E Training Centre was established on site to focus on specialized skills development and technical training.

2023 | Strategic Division Growth

Expanded into full time Mineral Processing while establishing Drilling and Blasting as a separate division for specialized rock on ground services.

Contract Crushing vs. Owning Your Own Plant: A Strategic Evaluation

Plant ownership feels like operational control. In practice, for a significant number of South African mining and quarry operations, it becomes one of the most expensive decisions on the books.

Contract crushing offers a structured alternative. In the current capital environment across Gauteng and broader South Africa, it is the model that an increasing number of experienced operations managers are selecting. This post sets out the considerations you need to evaluate before committing either way.

Understanding the Two Models

Plant ownership means your operation purchases, commissions, staffs, and maintains the crushing and screening plant. The asset sits on your balance sheet. The operational risk sits with your team.

Contract crushing is a service arrangement in which a specialist contractor supplies a fully equipped crushing and screening plant, operates it with qualified personnel, and maintains it throughout the contract period. Your operation pays for tonnes produced. The contractor carries the equipment, the technical expertise, and the mechanical risk.

Both models produce crushed aggregate. The difference lies in who carries the cost, the risk, and the management burden of getting there.

The Full Cost of Plant Ownership in South Africa

The purchase price of a crushing plant is the most visible cost. It is rarely the largest one over a project lifetime.

Capital costs (CAPEX) to account for at the outset:

  • Primary, secondary, and tertiary crusher units
  • Vibrating screens and classification equipment
  • Conveyor infrastructure, feed hoppers, and transfer points
  • Electrical installation, control systems, and instrumentation
  • Civil works, plant footprint preparation, and site establishment
  • Commissioning, calibration, and initial production trials

Ongoing operational costs (OPEX) that accumulate throughout the project:

  • Manganese liners, screen media, blow bars, and other wear components
  • Specialist maintenance labour and technical callout costs
  • Spare parts inventory, with lead times on imported components typically running between four and twelve weeks
  • Unplanned downtime losses, which in a production environment translate directly to revenue shortfall
  • Plant insurance, depreciation, and asset management administration
  • Operator wages, supervisory structure, and shift compliance costs

For a mid-range crushing plant operating between 150 and 250 tph, the total cost of ownership over a five-year period, when downtime losses are properly accounted for, consistently exceeds the original CAPEX figure by a material margin. This is not a theoretical observation. It is what the operational data shows.

What a Contract Crushing Arrangement Covers

Under a properly structured contract crushing arrangement, the cost model changes fundamentally.

In place of unpredictable CAPEX and variable OPEX, the operation works to a structured cost-per-tonne or monthly operational rate. Within that rate, the following are covered by the contractor:

  • Full plant supply and mobilisation to site
  • Qualified plant operators and on-site supervision
  • Scheduled and breakdown maintenance
  • Wear parts procurement and replacement management
  • Production reporting and throughput tracking against agreed targets

The result is a predictable, budgetable cost directly tied to tonnes produced. When the plant is not producing, the operation’s cost exposure is contained. When production requirements increase, the contractor scales accordingly.

A Direct Comparison Across Key Operational Factors

FactorPlant OwnershipContract Crushing
Initial capital outlayHigh — significant CAPEX commitmentLow to zero upfront capital requirement
Operational cost predictabilityVariable — subject to unplanned maintenance eventsFixed or structured rate against production
Downtime riskCarried entirely by the operationCarried by the contractor
Capacity flexibilityLimited by the fixed asset configurationAdjustable — contractor scales to production requirements
Technical expertiseRequires qualified in-house recruitmentIncluded within the service arrangement
Wear parts managementOperation’s responsibility and procurement burdenContractor’s responsibility
Balance sheet treatmentAsset recorded on the operation’s booksTreated as OPEX — capital remains available
Mobilisation for remote projectsComplex, costly, and time-consumingContractor manages full deployment logistics

When Plant Ownership Is the Appropriate Choice

Ownership is not the wrong answer in every scenario. It is the appropriate choice when the following conditions are genuinely met:

  • Crushing volumes are consistently high and reliably predictable across a project life of ten years or more
  • The operation has the internal technical capacity to maintain and manage the plant to the required standard
  • The site location is fixed and stable, with no prospect of relocation or significant production profile change
  • The operation’s capital structure can carry the asset without placing strain on working capital or constraining other investment priorities

Where any of those conditions are uncertain or subject to change, the ownership argument weakens considerably.

When Contract Crushing Is the Stronger Operational Choice

Contract crushing consistently delivers better value than ownership across the following scenarios.

Projects with a defined production timeline.
Construction and infrastructure projects, mining contracts, and quarry expansions operating over a two to five year window rarely justify the CAPEX of full plant ownership. A contract crushing arrangement delivers production from mobilisation without tying up capital in a depreciating asset.

Operations requiring rapid production ramp-up.
When a new mining contract is awarded or an infrastructure project demands immediate aggregate supply, an in-house plant that is not yet commissioned, or is undersized for the requirement, cannot respond. A contractor operating across the 50 to 500 tph range can match plant configuration to the production obligation from the outset.

Remote and cross-border project locations.
Deploying and maintaining owned crushing equipment at remote sites in Limpopo, Mpumalanga, or cross-border locations including Namibia, Botswana, or Mozambique introduces logistical and maintenance complexity that specialist contractors are specifically structured to manage.

Operations where capital preservation is a priority.
Releasing CAPEX from equipment ownership allows that capital to be directed towards the activities that generate the operation’s core margin: mining, processing, and project delivery.

What to Evaluate in a Contract Crushing Contractor

Not all contract crushing services operate to the same standard. A procurement evaluation should examine the following before any contract is awarded.

  • Throughput capacity range: Does the contractor’s fleet support production between 50 and 500 tph, and can they demonstrate it at your specific requirement?
  • Plant availability commitment: What uptime guarantee is formalised in the contract?
  • Wear parts and maintenance approach: Who holds stock, and what are the actual lead times for key components?
  • Operator qualifications and supervision: Are operators formally trained and MHSA compliant?
  • Sector and geography track record: Can the contractor demonstrate comparable project delivery in your material type and operating environment?
  • Mobilisation capability: What is the realistic timeline from contract award to first production on your site?
  • B-BBEE standing: Does the contractor’s verified status support your procurement and transformation requirements?

B&E International: Contract Crushing Across Gauteng and South Africa

B&E International, a member of the Raubex Group (JSE: RBX), delivers integrated crushing and screening solutions to mining, quarrying, and construction operations across Gauteng, Mpumalanga, Limpopo, and throughout Southern Africa.

Operating from our Kempton Park base on the East Rand, our teams deploy crushing and screening plants across the 50 to 500 tph range, configured to your material specification, product requirement, and project timeline. Our operators are qualified, our maintenance programmes are structured, and our production reporting is transparent.

We carry the plant. We carry the technical expertise. Your operation carries the output.

Speak to Our Technical Team Before You Commit

If you are evaluating contract crushing against plant ownership for an upcoming project, the time to have that conversation is before capital decisions are made.

Our team will assess your throughput requirements, project timeline, and material specification, and provide an honest evaluation of what each model will cost your operation in practice.