Container shipping lines mired in crisis
Companies
led by Maersk grapple with freight rates at record lows amid
sluggish growth in global trade
- The Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller, then the world's largest container ship, arrives at Gdansk port in Poland in 2013
19
May, 2016
The
Deira, an 18-year-old container ship, looks serene as she steams
steadily towards the Port of New York and New Jersey, the largest
port on the US east coast.
But
as the vessel operated by the United Arab Shipping Company nears
shore, there are signs of the
slump afflicting
the container shipping industry.
Streaks
of rust give the Deira a down-at-heel look — a reminder of many
container shipping lines’ precarious financial positions. The
on-deck containers, which once would have been almost all UASC’s
green, are a patchwork of other lines’ red and blue boxes. This
reflects how shipping lines are increasing their co-operation in an
attempt to improve their weak profitability.
The
industry, a vital link in the world’s supply of manufactured
goods, is suffering what could well turn out to be the deepest and
longest downturn in its 60-year history.
Container
shipping lines have made a series of investments in new, giant
vessels, and this glut of capacity has sent freight rates tumbling.
The Shanghai Containerised Freight Index — one of the few public
sources of information on what lines are charging to ship a
container — last month reached the lowest level since its
inception in 1998.
The
purchasing of these huge container ships looks ill-timed, given
global trade growth has been mainly sluggish since the 2008-09
financial crisis. Amid a slowing world economy, 2016 could be the
fifth straight year of subpar
expansion in
trade.
“Over the next few years, [container shipping is] a sector that’s going to really get slammed,” says Ron Widdows, a shipping consultant and former chief executive of Neptune Orient Lines, the Singapore-based line.
Against
this bleak backdrop, there are signs that the badly fragmented
container shipping industry is finally starting to consolidate, in
moves that should cut costs.
Germany’s
Hapag-Lloyd announced last month it was in talks about a possible
merger with the container shipping operations of UASC, owned by a
consortium of Gulf states.
France’s
CMA CGM, the third-largest container ship operator, in
December agreed
to buy Neptune
Orient Lines for $2.4bn. Also that month, China’s two biggest
state-owned container shipping lines, Cosco and China Shipping,
announced plans
to merge and
be called China Coco.
In
a related development, there has also been a far-reaching shake-up
of the container shipping alliances that stop short of full-blown
mergers but should improve efficiency because lines can share box
space on each others’ vessels.
This
month, three Japanese lines — Mitsui
OSK, K
Line and NYK —
outlined plans to form a new alliance with Hapag-Lloyd, South
Korea’s Hanjin Shipping and Taiwan’sYang
Ming,
to be known as The Alliance.
CMA
CGM announced last month it was forming a new partnership, called
the Ocean Alliance, with China Cosco, Taiwan’s Evergreen and Hong
Kong’s Orient Overseas Container Line.
The
partnership aims to create a stronger competitor for the P2
Alliance of Denmark’s Maersk Line and Switzerland’s
Mediterranean Shipping Company, operators of the two largest
container fleets.
But
some doubt whether these deals and alliances will enable the
companies involved to better withstand the industry’s dire
conditions.
“The
theory is you get economies of scale, therefore you’re better
armed,” says Neil Dekker of Drewry, the consultants. “Does that
work in reality? It’s an interesting question.”
Consolidation
should in theory bring greater rationality to an industry that has
struggled to align supply with demand.
Basil
Karatzas, a consultant, predicts container fleet growth of about 6
per cent this year, while Maersk Line expects container volumes —
a proxy for global trade — to expand by only between 1 and 3 per
cent.
In
February, AP Møller-Maersk, Maersk Line’s parent company, warned
that freight rates were lower than during the financial crisis.
In
the first quarter of 2016, Maersk generated $1,857 of revenue for
each 40ft container it carried on its ships, 25 per cent less than
one year earlier, and $203 below the average cost of moving each
box.
Maersk
Line’s first-quarter
net operating profit fell
95 per cent to just $37m, while most other listed container ship
operators recorded losses.
Their
losses partly stem from how these operators have sought to match
Maersk’s long-term strategy of investing in ever larger vessels
which, if operated full, can significantly cut the cost of carrying
each container.
The
average size of ship operating on the key Asia to Europe route has
grown 7.6 per cent every year since 2001, according to Drewry. The
average vessel on the route last year could carry 12,560 20ft
containers — three times the capacity of the Deira, which reached
the Port of New York and New Jersey last week.
The
Deira, operated by UASC
Mr
Widdows attributes this rush for huge ships to an announcement by
Maersk in 2013 that it was forming an alliance with Mediterranean
Shipping Company and CMA CGM.
While
China’s competition authorities blocked the alliance, Maersk and
Mediterranean Shipping Company pressed ahead with co-operation.
“[Maersk’s
rivals said to themselves] ‘Oh my God, we have to do something
about that [alliance]’,” says Mr Widdows. “We can be more
competitive with larger ships.”
In
2013, Maersk took delivery of its first so-called Triple
E vessel,
then ranked as the world’s largest container ship, capable of
carrying 18,300 20ft boxes. Other lines are now operating even
bigger ships.
But
these ships only provide increased efficiency if they are well
loaded. Orient Overseas Container Line reported that last year its
vessels were just 72 per cent full.
Most
important, there is scant evidence that shipping lines are willing
to take tough decisions and remove sufficient vessels from their
fleets such that freight rates rise to sustainably profitable
levels.
A
key test for the lines that are undertaking mergers will be whether
they are willing to lay up and scrap ships.
“You
need to remove some ships and then you can make the combined
business profitable,” says Paul Slater, a shipping financier.
Mr
Widdows is not optimistic about the industry’s future. Noting how
expansion of the global container fleet is likely to well exceed
“fairly anaemic” trade growth during 2017 and 2018, he says:
“The next couple of years look pretty bleak.”
On
June 26, like thousands of container ships before, China
Cosco’s
Andronikos will steam away from the anchorages off Panama’s
Caribbean coast towards the canal leading towards the Pacific
Ocean.
Yet
the Andronikos, at 300m long and 48m wide, is far broader than
any previous vessel to transit thePanama
Canal,
the man-made waterway that has connected the Atlantic and Pacific
oceans since 1914.
The
Andronikos will head towards a new channel, just to the east of
the existing one, and become the first vessel to traverse a chain
of vastly bigger locks constructed during the past 10 years to
open the canal to bigger, modern ships.
The
opening of the expanded lane of Panama locks is, according to
Neil Dekker of Drewry, a rare bright spot for the container
shipping industry.
Shipping
lines have been stuck for years using old, small container ships
to reach the Americas’ Atlantic coast from Asia.
Such
vessels have been limited by the original locks’ dimensions to
a maximum width of 33.5m and a length of 320m.
With
the new locks, lines will be able to deploy ships up to 366m long
and 49m wide, carrying up to 13,000 20ft containers.
“This
gives lines [the] means to . . . completely redesign
their networks, with the excess of big ships in the system that
the lines don’t know where to put,” says Mr Dekker.
But
some of the US east coast’s biggest ports — including the
Port of New York and New Jersey — are not yet fully ready for
the big ships.
That means, says Mr
Dekker, that, at least in the short term, lines face a dilemma.
Do they keep using smaller ships for some services? Or do they
use a hub port in the Caribbean and distribute the containers
from there?
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.