| Latest Forum Topics / Neptune Orient L Rg |
 Post Reply
|
|
NOL
|
|||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
18-Jun-2014 20:13
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
WORLD SHIPPING
World's top 30 container ports' volume increases 4.7pc in first quarter Shanghai Port CONTAINER throughput at the world's top 30 container ports increased 4.7 per cent in the first quarter as trade volumes continued to recover from the low growth since 2012, according to an Alphaliner survey. Tuesday, 17.Jun.2014, 22:44 (GMT) World's top 30 container ports' volume increases 4.7pc in first quarter CONTAINER throughput at the world's top 30 container ports increased 4.7 per cent in the first quarter as trade volumes continued to recover from the low growth since 2012, according to an Alphaliner survey. Mainland China ports, which account for 10 of the top 30 ports, achieved mixed results. The aggregate growth of the 10 biggest Chinese ports reached 5.1 per cent in the first quarter, compared to the 7.3 per cent increase a year earlier. Container volume through China's ports was up 5.5 per cent at 45.6 million TEU from January to March, with coastal ports growing 6.6 per cent, while river ports declined 3.8 per cent, said the Ministry of Transport. Contraction at river ports reflects lower domestic demand in China, while export growth at the main coastal ports remains relatively strong, said Alphaliner. European ports also showed mixed results, with North Europe's Rotterdam, Hamburg, Antwerp and Bremerhaven posting an aggregate growth of 2.3 per cent compared to a contraction of 1.8 per cent in the first quarter of 2013. The two main US ports of Los Angeles-Long Beach and New York-New Jersey posted a combined growth rate of 2.9 per cent, a slight improvement from the 2.4 per cent growth recorded last year. The total throughput of 16 main North American ports grew by 1.7 per cent during the first quarter, with east coast ports up 3.1 per cent, outperforming the west coast ports that were up 0.6 per cent. The five largest southeast Asian ports reported total growth of 3.7 per cent, up from 0.6 per cent growth last year. Singapore was up 3.9 per cent Port Kelang by 5.7 per cent and Tanjung Pelepas volume increased 1.3 per cent. This came "ahead of possible shifts later this year as the introduction of the new P3 services could see some of the transshipment volumes moved from Port Kelang to Singapore and Tanjung Pelepas", the report said. "Singapore is expected to add some five million TEU in annual handling capacity this year when it opens five berths at the new Pasir Panjang Terminal 5 while Tanjung Pelepas will add two million TEU with the launch of berths 13 and 14." In the Middle East, volumes at Jebel Ali port surged by 17.5 per cent year on year to 3.6 million TEU, following on from growth of just 2.7 per cent for the whole of 2013 over 2012. The strong performance resulted from increases in transshipment volumes amid strong demand growth in the Gulf region, as well as large infrastructure projects in East Africa. But Saudi Arabia's Jeddah port saw volumes plunge 5.7 per cent as it continued to struggle with congestion, and cargo diversions to the new King Abdullah port, 90 kilometres north of Jeddah. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
BullsAndBear
Veteran |
18-Jun-2014 09:38
Yells: "I come at the turn of the tide " |
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
Hostile buyover is definately out of the cards for NOL. Temasek has a controlling shareholding of NOL. If anything, Temasek has to give the nod for anything to happen.
|
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
|
|||||
|
HongLimPark
Senior |
18-Jun-2014 08:08
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
got rid of this junk at 0.970 yesterday. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
18-Jun-2014 03:27
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
No report mentioned implication to G6 alliance ?
JOC ? Maritime News ? Container Lines P3 rejection sends European carriers, ports scrambling Bruce Barnard, Special Correspondent | Jun 17, 2014 10:33AM EDT 18 1 2 23 LONDON ? Europe?s major ocean carriers, ports and shippers are urgently rethinking their business strategies following the shocking news this morning that Chinese antitrust authorities had rejected an application by Maersk Line, Mediterranean Shipping Co. and CMA CGM to join forces in the P3 Network. Maersk reacted calmly to the unexpected thumbs down from Beijing, saying there would be ?no material impact? on the group?s expected result for 2014. But that didn?t impress investors, as the Danish group?s share price plunged as much as 8.7 percent on the news, the biggest intra-day decline since May 16, 2012. It later recovered somewhat, and was down about 7 percent by midafternoon on the Copenhagen Stock Exchange. Although the collapse of the P3 won?t immediately affect Maersk Line, which expects its 2014 result to exceed 2013?s $1.5 billion profit, it?s sure to impact the carrier?s ability to keep cutting costs, the main benefit of the alliance with MSC and CMA CGM and the key to its surging profits at a time when most of its rivals are losing money. Of the three partners, Maersk was expected to reap the most benefit from the P3, with some analysts forecasting a $1 billion payoff from synergies and reduced costs. The vessels deployed by the P3 carriers were expected to cut bunker consumption by 8 percent, according to Jens Eskelund, managing director of Maersk China. CMA CGM was equally tranquil, saying it is confident it ?will maintain its operating performance and continue to outperform the industry.? But the French carrier also was counting on P3-driven cost cuts to offset softening freight rates and slowing traffic growth to boost operating profits, which declined 7.4 percent in the first quarter to $186 million from $201 million a year earlier. Europe?s ports will take an even bigger hit from the collapse of the P3. Antwerp was the major beneficiary when the carriers announced their schedules in October, gaining an extra call on the alliance?s Asia-North Europe service. Rotterdam, the Belgian port?s main rival, lost three export calls and two imports calls, more than half its Europe-Asia calls. Zeebrugge and Hamburg also lost out, Bremerhaven was unchanged, while Jade Weser, virtually empty since it opened in September 2012, gained a much-needed call. Rotterdam stands to be the main winner from the P3 collapse. It didn?t expect to lose traffic from the reduced number of P3 services because it would have handled a higher number of Maersk?s Triple E vessels, which are capable of carrying 18,000 20-foot-equivalent container units. Still, fewer calls would have reduced harbor dues and meant less work for ship pilots and tugboats. Europe?s biggest container port, however, doesn?t think the container shipping industry will stand still following the demise of the P3. There are ?more questions than answers,? a Rotterdam port spokesman said. ?We will have to let the dust settle.? ?It is still too early to make any pronouncements as to the possible consequences,? a spokesperson for the Antwerp Port Authority said. The port will contact its partners in the next few days to determine the precise impact of the scrapping of the P3 network, she added. While MSC rethinks its post-P3 strategy, the Geneva-based carrier at least can take solace from the fact that the Port of Antwerp allowed it to consolidate its activities in the port and quit its current facility more than 15 years before its concession expired in order to handle the extra traffic that MSC expected under the Maersk-CMA CGM alliance. And, although the collapse of the P3 is a blow for Maersk, MSC and CMA CGM, it provides an extra boost for Hapag-Lloyd, whose merger with Chile?s CSAV was largely driven by the German carrier?s bid to keep in touch with the world?s three largest container lines. Contact Bruce Barnard at [email protected]. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
18-Jun-2014 03:17
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
JOC ? Maritime News ? Container Lines ? P3 Network
P3 rejection a lifeline for smaller Asian carriers Peter Tirschwell | Jun 17, 2014 1:07PM EDT The rejection of the P3 shows how dominant the world?s largest carriers were set to become if their proposed mega-alliance took effect. The reality was that P3 was going to make the three largest carriers very difficult to compete with. Their joint control of the largest ships would have put them at a decisive cost advantage over competitors, allowing them to better withstand rate volatility or initiate predatory pricing with relative impunity. Given how weak a number of the mid-tier Asian carriers are today, the alliance could have sent any number of them into bankruptcy. That of course would have made the P3 carriers? position even stronger. All of the world?s major carriers survived multibillion-dollar losses during the Great Recession. But they may not have survived the P3, and that message was heard loud and clear in Beijing. For the U.S., with none of its own carriers remaining as major players, its interests should be aligned with the big retailers and exporters that are some of the world?s largest users of container shipping services. But though its regulators ? or at least some of them ? clearly saw the long term implications, it didn?t object. Europe, which has led the world in promoting competition in container shipping by eliminating antitrust immunity but is where the P3 carriers are all based, let the alliance proceed. China drew the line. While China is by far the world?s largest container market and its ports are the largest in the world, its carriers are not in the world?s top tier and have struggled to be profitable. China accounted for more than a quarter of global containerized exports in 2010, according to Global Insight, while its international container lines, Cosco and China Shipping, together make up less than 8 percent of global capacity. That is a disconnect. Maersk, CMA CGM and MSC, the erstwhile P3 members, collectively control 37 percent of global capacity, according to Alphaliner. In other sectors like dry bulk China has asserted its right to have a dominant position in carrying the cargoes that its nation consumes. It may not be doing that directly in the container sector in rejecting the P3, but it is supporting its own carriers in doing so. There may be calls from Beijing for a merger now that the government has thrown its carriers a lifeline. China was not alone among Asian governments in seeing the P3 as going too far. The ability of the world?s largest carrier, Maersk, to generate profits over the past year while most of the industry was mired in losses must have been seen as a sign of things to come. The Korean Shipowners Association, reflecting the views of Hyundai Merchant Marine and Hanjin Shipping, was clearly worried about the impact, and South Korea?s approval emerged as a late, unanticipated obstacle to the P3. It did not matter that the P3 carriers would have shared assets but still competed commercially, and there was no serious possibility of commercial collusion. That was beside the point. Through their control of the biggest ships, they would have been in a superior position on costs and been in a position to drive out competitors, even if they didn?t do that collectively. The Chinese saw that and called them on it. Contact Peter Tirschwell at [email protected] and follow him on Twitter: @petertirschwell. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
|
|||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
18-Jun-2014 02:01
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
Has G6 begun operation ?
Maersk ?surprised? as P3 falls, will reach its goals alone By Gary Howard from London P3 partner Maersk was ?surprised" by China?s decision to block the P3 network sharing agreement, but will achieve its benefits alone. "The decision does come as a surprise to us, of course, as the partners have worked hard to address all the regulators' concerns." stated Maersk Group ceo Nils Andersen. The P3 alliance between Maersk, CMA CGM and MSC was announced on 18 June 2013 and abandoned today after Chinese regulators blocked the deal. "The P3 alliance would have enabled Maersk Line to make further reductions in cost and CO2 emissions and not least improve its services to its customers with a more efficient vessel network. Nevertheless, I'm quite confident Maersk Line will accomplish those improvements anyway. It has delivered on those improvements over the last five quarters in the absence of P3 and I'm confident it will continue to do so." Maersk stated that the failure of the P3 initiative will have no material impact on its financial results. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
18-Jun-2014 01:57
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
I thought the 'market terms' at the end of the article referred to fixing the freight rate and logically higher than current which will not be good for shippers and hence their objection. Counting on G6 to lead now.
Main Menu China sinks P3 Alliance By Gary Howard from London Plans for the P3 alliance of MSC, CMA CGM and Maersk have been abandoned after the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) blocked the deal under China's company merger rules. Preparatory work for the alliance began after it was announced in June last year and operations were scheduled to begin towards the end of the year. After the European Commission and US Federal Maritime Commission approved the deal, it was expected that the Chinese would endorse the proposed network, more-so once the Wall Street Journal spoke to two insiders who suggested the deal would go through. "In Maersk Line we have worked hard to address the Chinese questions and concerns. So of course it is a disappointment. P3 would have provided Maersk Line with a more efficient network and our customers with a better product." commented Vincent Clerc, cto and cmo at Maersk Line. Delays in gaining approval from US and EU competition authorities pushed back the alliance's start date to the end of 2014, at which point P3 would have accounted for 255 vessels on 29 loops across the the Asia-Europe, transpacific and transatlantic trades. Chinese shippers called on authorities to block the deal in December, as they believed the alliance would have too much power to dictate market terms. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
18-Jun-2014 01:47
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
Hope G6 will emerged the biggest beneficiary and hence NOL/APL. I'm wary about shippers rejoicing as they will like to see the low freight rates continue.
|
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
|
|||||
|
sgng123
Supreme |
18-Jun-2014 01:35
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
P3 veto might lead Maersk,CMA and MSC to embark on a M& E hostile buyover of those smaller players currently in G6 and CKHYE so that they can still fill up their 18-20K TEU new ships without going into the red for undercutting. Europe flushed with new money infused by ECB recent monenary easing, enjoy the fun if they decided to eat up the smaller players and asia national government playing the defensive move by counter bidding. Long time never see a Merger and Acqusition in shipping since 2006 when maersk shallow up P& O, time for some excitment. But all these is purely mine guessing, what they want to do is anyone guess. Maybe China with all the free cash hoarding up in reserve should just privatise their national lines and eat up a few liners to create the biggest line to overtake maesrk and carried made in china good solely lol they got the money and cargo to afford it. Cheap money magic soon... |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
sgng123
Supreme |
18-Jun-2014 01:14
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
initial that was mine thinking too but reality turned out that P3 did not expect to cut capacity instead fixed a 2.3 million TEU capacity, meaning they not inclined to support freigth rate instead they start a rate war to grab as much market share as possible before the merger start as seen in 2013 poor rate environment. But now their plan backfired badly and now the industry leader by market share is G6 not maesrk line due to the fact P3 got killed by china. Funny in channelasia report it is reported decision to kill P3 also based off interest of china national carriers like what i had ever mentioned. National interest come first in Asia, customer service quality last of the line sadly. Currently Maersk, CMA and MSC going to had hard time rethinking about their future strategy since they not going to enjoy the kind of vessel sharing advantage P3 and CKHYE enjoying. Freight rate might actually stabilise after this, gona monitor SCFI for it. If rate stabilise then good for ship too, meaning the rapid decline of freight rate since 2012 would come to a end and stabilise around this level same as 2013. After China banned P3, lot of shippers/analyst praised it for doing that lol and that included lot of european shippers too lol. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
17-Jun-2014 22:22
|
||||
|
x 1
x 0 Alert Admin |
You meant P3 alliance will do more harm to the already weak freight rate and push it even lower to kill all competitors ? I thought they will help to stabilize and to keep those General Rate Increases hold so that overall freight rate can return to a more sustainable level than current ?
|
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
sgng123
Supreme |
17-Jun-2014 19:48
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
Like i mentioned in previouspost, container shipping is not all about business but political meaning too. P3 alliance now is offically dead, China had denied itof the right to operate in china. Maesrk, CMA and MSC now only had approval of US and EU effectively meaning only translantic and major north south lane can be operated as P3. Asia to USWC/EC and Europe , they had to individually use their own ships to load up meaning the return leg also the same, good thing is those big 3 players now know they cannot drive down freight rate any lower as they don had the alliance advantage of G6. That the problem when u got over 45% of market share and u want to further that by entering alliance, the china government would shoot u down like a airplane, this also mean any shipping line that try to overstep their respective market share would get shoot down by the chinese lol. Very lucky G6 market share is in the sweet spot position and members lines consist of chinese interest. Now G6 would become the most competitive alliance after P3 is shoot down by chinese government. Hope next few quarters, efficiency would shoot up and cost of operating go down significantly. In summary never go against the china government, u be shooting ur own feet like what maersk, CMa and Msc had learned lol same for temasek owned companies. Container shipping is hard t opredict as it is not governed by purely profit and loss, it is more of national interest of government as it promote global trade, if anyone try to disrupt the balance of global trade then u get shoot down simple. http://www.lloydslist.com/ll/sector/containers/article443491.ece |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
|
|||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
17-Jun-2014 00:20
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
PUBLISHED JUNE 16, 2014
US manufacturing output increases solidly in May PRINT |EMAIL THIS ARTICLE US manufacturing output rose solidly in May as production increased across the board, bolstering expectations that economic growth would rebound strongly this quarter - PHOTO: REUTERS [WASHINGTON] US manufacturing output rose solidly in May as production increased across the board, bolstering expectations that economic growth would rebound strongly this quarter. Factory production increased 0.6 per cent last month after slipping by a revised 0.1 per cent in April, the Federal Reserve said on Monday. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast output rising 0.5 per cent after a previously reported 0.4 per cent decline. The report was the latest evidence the economy was regaining steam after a dismal first quarter. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
spore1
Supreme |
16-Jun-2014 22:44
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
96.5 cents and below may be good for consideration of accumulation for long... sporeshare.blog spot.sg/2014/05/nol.html |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
16-Jun-2014 22:22
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
Main Menu
Singapore port registers higher box throughput in May By Lee Hong Liang from Singapore The port of Singapore has handled container throughput of 2.94m teu in May, marking the highest monthly volumes so far this year. Last month?s throughput of 2.94m teu was 3.9% higher compared to 2.83m teu recorded in May 2013, according to preliminary estimates from the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA). Container volumes moved in May this year was also 5.4% higher compared to 2.79m teu registered in April this year, data from MPA showed. In the first five months of this year, Singapore port moved a total throughput of 13.67m teu, an improvement of 4.4% over 13.09m teu recorded in the corresponding period of 2013. Published inAsia, Containers, Port & Logistics |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
earlybird14
Supreme |
16-Jun-2014 14:21
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
What else can you say? Other than temasek and US politic issue?
APL win the award no nol. Because US has no other world container shipping company, only can give APL. APL will still be there even NOL announced bankrupt, APL is a US company, it will be protected under US bankruptcy law. Temasek, US political issue, unreasonable expectation of world economic boom(not recovery, recovery can't save NOL). What else? If nothing else, you are holding a big risk, because there are either not going to happen or reason for stock rally.
|
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
sgng123
Supreme |
16-Jun-2014 00:59
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
winning award is more political than business, just to show those democrat that apl is behind obama environment push. NOL is part political and part business group where they put retired/newly scholars there to skill up on their management skill, explain lose so much money all these years but did not go up in smoke. Government dumping money into this ship to provide training for future singapore leaders, same go for SIA, Singtel etc. Those temasek linked companies are all training centres for our future leaders ... sign. Lot of CPF money go up in smoke and government cover it up. Just don know how much money they used to cover Olam massive dark hole, it a very big hole so big that temasek had to privatise it to save the training centre lol. Maybe after NOl had finished it fleet renewal programme, next step is to privatise it and it is very very easy to do that since they controlled like 67% just need another 23% from banks/trading house then they can do forced acquistion upon getting 90% approval. But don worry too much , the offer price would not be too cheap skate due to the unrealized treasure of the terminal / logistic plus the market share it commanded in the united state and asia. the privatisation would be already in the work who know, just need to win over the banks/trading house with a attractive offer then it done deal waiting to be announced.
|
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
sgng123
Supreme |
16-Jun-2014 00:42
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
don worry too much lah, NOL had done what is required to remain competitive and this year are completing it fleet renewal programme. The issue is how much lower can the slot cost go down in 2Q14 to return the profit margin, last drop in slot cost in 2Q13 surprised lot of peep in forum and hope this time round deliveries made in 2013 and 1Q14 could all be put into deployment and reduced the slot cost to return ship to profit. Now share price very quiet, low volume but in July we should see market signal coming out, Up or Down is anyone guess. As maesrk line had demostrated, using newer and more fuel efficiency ships plus focus on load factor would return profit back to liner, if NOl follow strictly to this principle then maybe we would see light at end of tunnel. By the way for P3 to swallow more market share is very difficult due to national interest by countires, united states ans china would never allow their commerce to be dominated by european liners. Expalin why temasek willing to fork out US$4B for fleet replacement they got support from government in us and singapore, by the freight rate might never return to pre recession level as current rate reflected the price customers willing to pay for liner using the latest fuel efficiency ships. Basically current freight rate is the new norm set in after the whole container shipping undergo a structured transformation from smaller to ultra large ships. Liners which did not have the financial power to buy newer ship would be priced out of the market all together. But it seem like the top 15 liners all survived with majority on govenment handout to buy new ships. To make more money, only way to go is cut cost and sell away non core asset to reduce taxes incurred and labor cost etc for NOL, hope they smart enough to realise this and make arrangement to dump away the terminal and logistic business as it make no sense to provide full premium service with the rate customers willing to pay. Everyone are on budget service lol, just need the transportation across ocean rest of journey they can get even cheaper rate for the inland service to deliver to warehouse/customer. Selling away the terminal and logistic business would return NOL balance sheet to a more healthy level plus higher share price associated with it. hard 3 years for lot of investors but endure/preserve key to winning |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
14-Jun-2014 17:42
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
The below article probably sums up very well the situation of the shipping industry. However, it is also in the darkest hours that opportunities avail themselves. Fittest will survive while the rest will perish and the posture will be green again. Will it take another 5 years ? Big question is whether NOL will make it. The fact is NOL has the size and has taken the action and will e taking delivery of all its new orders by this year and putting them into the sea. It may be 3-4 years behind Mersk but it is also ahead of still many smaller players. P3 will never conquer 100% of global market. There are signs in India that scrapping rather than re-channeling older ships back into the sea because of lower capital cost due to forced acquisition upon loan default is the emerging trend.
The shipping recovery that never arrived As we approach the middle of 2014, shipping?s economics remain stuck in the doldrums will little or no recovery in sight. The surplus capacity of ships to cargoes requiring transportation has been aggravated by the delivery of a massive orderbook of new ships that followed the boom markets of the middle of the last decade. This surplus is not limited to a few markets but, with the possible exception of gas, both liquefied natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas, it has affected the rest and in particular the wet and dry bulk, and the container markets. The effect has been severe as few ships in these markets generate a profit after operating expenses, debt interest and amortisation. Numerous public companies have gone bankrupt, as have many private ones. The German KG funds have been almost completely wiped out and have created huge losses for the German shipping banks. The average age of the world fleet is at a historic low, meaning the surplus will be around for at least another decade. Unfortunately when companies go bankrupt or when their ships are arrested and sold, they do not go away but continue to trade with lower capital costs, thereby prolonging the depressed freight markets. Furthermore, a majority of the fleets in most sectors trade in the spot markets without any period charter cover, in the false expectation that markets will recover or secondhand values will increase. This, however, ignores the facts that shipyard capacity remains high and in countries such as South Korea and China has now become a strategic industry supported with domestic banks funding the construction period and government funds backing export credit. All without any secure operating income from charters. This rush to order new ships has been fuelled by an influx of new money, both equity and bonds from private equity and hedge funds that are gambling on ship values and not the long-term revenue streams from operations. The vast majority of ships on order today has no contractual employment and no evidential income other than indications of future ship values referenced back to the boom years of 10 years ago. Some have likened this influx of new money to the Blind Capital of the mid-1800s: ?Credulous capital, ignoring risks, flooding into unwise investments?. There is no sign of any investment interest from mutual funds or institutional investors such as pension funds or life-insurance companies, which are usually averse to short-term gambles. The speculative day traders have fun playing the rumours and the price volatility of the publicly traded companies. Even more surprising is the activity of some of the private equity funds buying distressed bank debt at marginal discounts. If a shipowner cannot serve his existing bank debt, how is he going to service the new owners of the debt who have much higher expectations of return on their investments than simple bank margins? It has been said that some of these funds are looking for default so they can convert the loans to equity, take over the ships and sell them for a profit. The track record of these deals so far is not good and the current focus on newbuildings only extends the excess fleet capacity and prolongs the lower freight rates which are the key economic of the shipping industry. The list of publicly traded shipping companies on the New York stock exchanges is the worst performing of any sector. Original equity has been emasculated by secondary offerings and huge secured debts that in many cases today exceed the market value of the ships that are the security. In the past 12 months, we have seen the emergence of new forms of ?junk bonds?, with double-digit interest rates, which rapidly escalate on default and look more like the cash advance lending that proliferates among the poor. This junk is surprisingly not shown as debt in the borrower?s balance sheets and is ironically named as ?Perpetual?. So while new money is finding the shipping industry, what is the outlook for the services it provides? The freight markets for most ship types remain severely depressed because of the excess capacity that was generated from the newbuilding orders that followed the brief boom of 10 years ago, and then faced the financial crises and the global recession that still envelops the world today. Reckless activity in ordering hundreds of new ships will only extend further the bad markets. This will push any balancing between supply and demand into the next decade, at the earliest. The claims of fuel economies of the new ships will not force earlier scrapping as the older ships will have less capital invested in them and can be maintained to operate until they are at least 20 years old. There is no evidence of any increased demand for shipping, except in the gas sectors, and the newfound resources of oil and gas in the US will have a negative effect on crude oil shipments. This may well be compounded by the new pipelines between Russia and China, the reduction in consumption of gasoline in China and the expansion of fracking in Europe. The US will reduce its imports of crude oil by at least 50% in the next 10 years and convert its trucking fleets to natural gas by 2025. Unfortunately, it will take several years before the current influx of new money faces the reality that it is operating income that makes a business and not the fluctuating values of the operating assets. Paul Slater is chairman and chief executive of First International. |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||
|
Lucky03
Elite |
14-Jun-2014 17:27
|
||||
|
x 0
x 0 Alert Admin |
If only winning such awards can help NOL to turn profitable !
News APL wins inaugural US Coast Guard security award Washington DC: Singapore?s APL, the containerline of the NOL Group, has won the 2013-2014 Rear Admiral Richard E. Bennis Award for Excellence in Maritime Security, conferred by the United States Coast Guard (USCG). APL was recognised as ?Company of the Year? for its strong commitment to US security as well as the marine transportation system, particularly its outstanding contributions towards the implementation of the US Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) requirements. ?APL is honoured to receive the Bennis Award as it is a perfect complement to the Osprey Award, the USCG?s highest environmental accolade which we received in 2012,? said APL president Kenneth Glenn. ?With these back-to-back award wins from the USCG, APL demonstrates an unequivocal dedication to securing international maritime trade and protecting the marine environment. We endeavour to fulfill this same commitment in every operating location across the globe.? The newly-created, bi-annual Bennis Award aims to encourage organisations to develop a comprehensive culture of security by assessing their overall security programs, seeking creative solutions to address known risks, building a system of continuous improvement, and sharing best practices that will benefit similar organisations. [13/06/14] |
||||
| Useful To Me Not Useful To Me | |||||