Market Overview of Global & Regional Port Market

Transcription

1 Market Overview of Global & Regional Port Market Chris Rowland 3 rd Annual Port and Rail Expansion Summit, Istanbul, 10 April _presentation v1

2 Agenda Container shipping 2006 versus 2013 an industry transformed? Global demand & supply Global consolidation Regional demand & supply Case study: the North Adriatic Conclusions

4 An industry transformed? 2006: Pre-recession Golden Age Conference system: consortia of shipping lines able to agree freight rates Bunkers: 350/tonne Europe-Far East mean ship capacity: 5,600 TEU Average speed: 20 knots 2013: Post-recession steadystate Conference system: ended in 2008 (just as recession hit!) Bunkers: $600/tonne Europe-Far East mean ship capacity: 10,100 TEU Average speed: 16 knots But unit costs & freight rates per TEU in 2013 roughly the same as in 2006!

5 Global container shipping profit/loss: an erratic period

7 Global containerised trade Immediate aftermath of recession led to 7.8% decline in traffic, but rebounded well Global containerised trade has grown steadily since % growth % growth Driven by increasing wealth, trade liberalisation & continuing availability of cheap container shipping MDST s trend-based forecasts imply healthy growth: +13% overall

8 Global utilization continuing to fall *=takes into account DwtTEU restriction in certain trade lanes

9 Costs and revenues also continuing to fall continuing falling rates afforded by scale economies inevitably heralding in the era of consolidation

10 Actual demand vs. capacity by ship class Underlying demand grew +19% 2010 to 2013 Global capacity grew +24% 2010 to 2013

11 Forecast demand v. forecast supply TEU Class Extra TEU by 2015 Increase over ,357 73% ,920 27% ,048 40% ,930 19% ,688 6% ,030 5% ,607 7% ,103 5% ,163 2% < 500 5,169 5% Overall newbuilds on order to increase fleet capacity by 16% Newbuilds >10,000 TEU increase is 39% But MDST s forecast demand is for growth of only 13% Excess demand can only increase rates

13 The shipping industry response: economies of scale then consolidation In global container shipping industry faced with a perfect storm of: Fall in demand due to global economic recession Higher fuel costs Loss of conference system Initial response from largest lines was to reduce cost/teu carried: Slow steaming Deploying larger ships to secure economies of scale Latest response to consolidate in global alliances Rate volatility is illusory

14 Spot rates versus global unit revenue versus Maersk freight rates (2012Q1=100)

15 Industry consolidation Largest 3 liner companies currently propose integrating services to use largest ships Market share (of capacity) will exceed EU thresholds of 30% G6 extending geographic scope & nature of relationship Progress towards regulatory compliance: Federal Maritime Commission given (qualified) approval to P3 & G6 Alliances must self assess for European Commission Will Chinese authorities seek to protect their shipping lines?

16 Deep Sea container service supply Effect of market concentration for the E/W trade lanes (2014Q1) No. owned Present fleet Newbuilds (>8000TEU) Future No. chartered Mean ship capacity TEU Mean ship No. of ships capacity TEU Mean ship No. of ships capacity TEU P3 Members - CMA-CGM , Maersk , MSC , P3 Members Total , , ,713 CKYHE-Green Alliance , ,814 G6 Alliance , ,183 P3 members currently have a fleet of 326 ships + 88 newbuilds = 414 ships of a mean capacity of 8,800 TEU Plan is for a dramatic reduction in ships to 255 with 10,700 TEU mean capacity The scale economies available to the P3 members, will confer an immediate competitive advantage as costs will fall

17 The emerging oligopoly & its implications Oligopolistic market structure emerging with three dominant alliance: P3, G6 & CKYH Green Alliance Differentiation through pricing and inland logistics NOT shipping operations Little service differentiation Containers increasingly routed via complex networks Emphasis on delivery date not absolute speed (following example of Daily Maersk ) Differentiation through pricing & inland logistics NOT shipping operations Huge impact on ports: Concentration of market power with buyers Preference for in-house terminals? Concentration on fewer transhipment ports? Deep water quays & operational pressures to handle fewer calls by larger ships Requirement for efficient connections to hinterland

19 Growth in European deep sea container import trade

20 Growth in European deep sea container export trade

21 Med-Far East trade lane: demand Imports fluctuated since 2011, reflecting very mixed fortunes in Med Basin region -5.3% % Exports grown steadily since % growth % growth MDST s trend-based forecasts imply: +24% imports, +19% for exports

22 Med-North America trade lane: demand Imports fluctuated since 2011, reflecting very mixed fortunes in Med Basin region -1.8% % Exports grown steadily since % % growth MDST s trend-based forecasts imply: +1% imports, +11% for exports

23 Med-North America containerised trade Overall growth of 25% in imports & 12% in export TEU Imports collapsed by 44% & exports by 25% in 2009 Since 2009 imports +60% & exports +34%

24 Demand to/from Turkey 19% growth in imports & 24% growth in exports Imports forecast to grow by 2% in 2014 & 7% in 2015 Exports forecast to grow by 14% in 2014 & 6% in 2015

25 Demand to/from Black Sea region Maritime containerised goods to/from Bulgaria, Georgia, Moldova, Romania & Ukraine 16% growth in imports & 24% growth in exports Imports forecast to grow by 10% in 2014 & 7% in 2015 but disruptive events?

26 Demand to/from East Med region Maritime containerised goods to/from Cyprus, Egypt, Greece, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon & Palestine 11% growth in imports & 25% growth in exports Imports forecast -4% in 2014 & +5% in 2015 but (again) disruptive events?

27 West Med container port market Overall West Med market declined by about 9% in 2009, but has gradually recovered Achieved growth of 2.5% in 2013 Growth slowed by economic conditions in larger markets such as Spain and Italy Market share being gained by Spanish ports at expense of Italian transhipment ports & Tyrrhenian ports Malta secured greater share of transhipment market

28 Near sourcing Switch of production closer to markets due to: Rising labour costs in China Need for greater responsiveness in supply chain Desire to reduce inventory costs Example UK imports of clothing & accessories Labour intensive Fast-moving tastes & fashion China just beginning to lose market share, but to countries such as Bangladesh Lack of clear evidence of impact of near-sourcing in this market?

29 Average ship size increasing Shipping lines responded by reducing capacity in 2012 particularly to North Europe, but also to West Med Reduction in capacity on main line to North Europe continued in 2013 Average ship size increased fewer, bigger ships to secure economies of scale

31 Case study: issues for the North Adriatic Serves relatively dynamic C&E Europe region plus N Italy, but needs to extend hinterland to secure market share Can offer direct access to market & close to Suez Peripheral region seeking direct calls rather than feeders Challenges of accommodating larger ships: Berths with adequate depth of water Competitive intermodal rail freight services Rail connections to hinterland Competing directly with Northern Range ports MDST studies for NAPA in 2011 & 2013

32 Northern Range: current dominance Source: MDST ECPDM

33 European Container Port Demand Model Computer model to simulate container port market for European continental mainland Base Case 2012 & scenarios for 2030 Objective of model: to describe & explain the market based on generalised door-to-door transport costs Cost-based model which assumes that shipping lines & shippers seek lowest cost solution Data inputs: Trade data = O/D matrix between Europe & rest of the world Container shipping costs/teu between world regions & 40 European container ports Port costs/teu Road, rail & inland waterway costs/unit Cost models used to explain current port traffic volumes in 2012

34 2030 NAPA Development Potential Scenario Developed what if scenarios for NAPA Potential Development Scenario based on: Trade growth & larger ships at all European ports Deeper water facilities at NAPA ports & competitive market to attract more direct calls from larger vessels Longer trains for inland distribution from all European ports More liberalisation of European rail freight market Internalisation of external costs

35 Results of 2030 NAPA Development Potential Scenario 2012 NAPA Development Scenario Increase NAPA % Northern Range % Tyrrhenian % Black Sea % Other % Total % Total growth of 227% for North Adriatic ports compared to 66% market growth to reach 5.9 MTEU in 2030 North Adriatic share increases from 5.5% to 11.3% Northern Range maintains 55% market share, but European transport system more balanced

36 North Adriatic: 2012 versus 2030 Base Case 2012 NAPA Development Potential Scenario 2030

37 Northern Range: 2012 versus 2030 Base Case 2012 NAPA Development Potential Scenario 2030

38 What is needed in North Adriatic by 2030? More container terminal capacity with deeper water (c. 15 metres) Up-graded rail network capacity from ports, with 750m long trains More rail freight liberalisation Competitive deep sea container shipping industry one service provider would not be enough! Issues vary around the Med, but in general terms these requirements probably apply to the whole Mediterranean Basin Simply reflects changing world trading patterns Emphasis on East of Suez rather than Transatlantic Relative economic dynamism of C&E Europe, Turkey & Black Sea regions compared to NW Europe

40 Conclusions Most dynamic economies towards the south and east of Europe/Med so likely to be faster growth in these regions Trend towards near-sourcing could accelerate this trend Impact of disruptive events? Shipping lines introducing larger ships to secure economies & reducing capacity

41 Thank you!