Saturday, April 30, 2016


How to drive green supply chain transformation





shipping-containers

Experts gathered this week at BusinessGreen’s Leaders Forum event in London to discuss key strategies for unearthing and addressing environmental issues buried deep in supply chains
Across India, cotton fields have been transformed into baked earth plains as the country endures one of the worst droughts in its history. Meanwhile, in Southern Africa, a strong El Nino has caused the lowest levels of recorded rainfall in decades, spelling disaster for small communities struggling to keep crops and livestock alive. Even in the UK, farmers are on standby to make sure their newborn lambs withstand this week's unseasonable snowfall, which has blanketed parts of northern England and Scotland.
As extreme weather events become more frequent and more severe, the risks to supply chains around the world grow ever greater. Meanwhile, rising demand for land, water, and energy from a growing middle class population is adding further pressure to resource supplies, and post-Paris the growing likelihood of new emissions regulations and increased scrutiny of corporate behaviour adds another dimension to the supply chain puzzle.

One of the key strategies speakers were keen to highlight was the role of strong procurement policies to drive change in supplier behaviour and embed responsible sourcing policies internally. Dexter Galvin, head of the CDP's supply chain programme, labelled procurement "the most effective lever" in driving change in the supply chain - a point which Peter Aldous, Conservative MP for Waveny and co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Sustainable Resource Group, echoed in his call for sustainable procurement to be embedded across all government departments.
Against this backdrop, experts from some of the world's leading brands, consultancies and NGOs gathered at BusinessGreen's inaugural Leaders Forum in London this week to discuss the most effective strategies for managing supply chain and resource risk - and how to transform this risk into an opportunity.
The Crown Estate provided a compelling example of how a strong, sustainable procurement policy can transform a company culture, and the behaviour of suppliers. The property giant and asset manager for the UK's seabeds has just rewritten its procurement policy so that it now has sustainability "written all over it", according to head of sustainability Claudine Blamey. She said the firm now gives contractors clear tools and targets to eliminate as much waste and emissions as possible from its supply chain. For example, Blamey described how the firm now invests in buildings that can be "dismantled" rather than demolished at the end of their useful life, slashing waste levels.
Meanwhile, Paul Taylor, senior manager of environmental sustainability at the LEGO Group, explained how the toymaker has working with suppliers to develop innovative greener products and materials via a series of strategic risk management meetings with core suppliers. The meetings have sustainability as a permanent item on the agenda - a move that helps to make clear that sustainability is a "conversation that's had regularly, and they see that it's important to us and it's not going away really makes sure that we get traction," he explained.
Delegates also flagged targets as an essential tool for driving environmental improvements across the supply chain. "We've seen that our member companies which have a clear target for their supply chain emissions reductions, then correlates very clearly into much better performance in the supply chain," noted CDP's Galvin.
And as more and more companies begin to set targets for supply chain carbon reductions - driven in part by the continuing pressure on firms to crack down on emissions in light of the Paris Agreement - suppliers will be given less wiggle room, he predicted. "As more members have clear targets for their supply chain, then they will get less and less tolerant of suppliers that aren't adhering to their requirements," he predicted.
L'Oréal, for example, has just made a commitment that its top 300 suppliers will have a carbon reduction target in place by 2020 - and has made clear it isn't afraid to deselect suppliers who don't perform.
Drinks giant Diageo is also enthusiastic about the power of targets. "We love targets," declared Michael Alexander, head of water, agriculture and environmental sustainability at the company. "We love KPI's, we love data... That's the modern way of businesses, and that's the modern way of particularly consumer goods companies with complex supply chains."
Yet alongside implementing strict supplier standards, delegates also spoke of the innovation and creativity that can emerge when suppliers are afforded freedom to develop their own solutions to sustainability challenges.
Alexander explained that although Diageo operates a tight ship with its centralised targets, suppliers in its global markets can choose how to best achieve them. "We're a decentralised business," he said. "[Our suppliers] will adjust the model, they will adjust the approach, but they've got the targets to meet centrally," he explained.
Similarly, LEGO's Taylor revealed how he has used the brand's internal innovation platform - 'Inside Ideas' - to leverage supplier engagement. Normally, Inside Ideas can only be accessed by LEGO employees, where they use the platform to post and debate new ideas for the business. Taylor opened the platform up to 30 key LEGO suppliers to allow them to post ideas on how to improve the company's supply chain, resulting in workable proposals for making waste, transport and printing services more efficient.
Meanwhile, Aleyn Smith-Gillespie, associate director for business services
at The Carbon Trust, which has today published a new report on supply chain transformation and resource efficiency, said firms such as GlaxoSmithKline are also harnessing supplier innovation to tackle environmental challenges. The pharmaceutical firm's Supplier Exchange platform is a forum allowing more than 500 suppliers to share knowledge, best practices, and data. "One of the things we discovered through this process was that a lot of suppliers had a tremendous number of ideas for energy efficiency in their own operations," Smith-Gillespie said.
Supply chains are a source of significant corporate risk, both now and in the future. But if managed effectively, they are also a source of clear opportunity. To cite just one statistic, last year suppliers analysed by CDP reported $6.6bn of savings from emissions reductions activity. 
Tackling the environmental impact of supply chains is perhaps one of the toughest challenges facing sustainability executives. But it seems that there are clear wins to be had through implementing strong procurement policies and ambitious targets - while allowing suppliers the freedom to innovate and come up with their own solutions to tricky challenges. And those companies that tackle the supply chain puzzle head-on will boost their resilience, burnish their environmental credentials, and cut their risk profile for decades to come.

Thursday, April 28, 2016

The Driverless Truck is Coming, and It’s Going to Automate Millions of Jobs

Recently, a convoy of self-driving trucks drove across Europe and arrived at the Port of Rotterdam. No technology will automate away more jobs—or drive more economic efficiency—than the driverless truck.
Shipping a full truckload from L.A. to New York costs around $4,500 today, with labor representing 75% of that cost. But those labor savings aren’t the only gains to be had from the adoption of driverless trucks.
Where drivers are restricted by law from driving more than 11 hours per day without taking an 8 hour break, a driverless truck can drive nearly 24 hours per day. That means the technology would effectively double the output of the U.S. transportation network at 25% of the cost.
And the savings become even more significant when you account for fuel efficiency gains. The optimal cruising speed from a fuel efficiency standpoint is around 45 miles per hour, whereas truckers who are paid by the mile will drive much faster. Further fuel efficiencies will be had as the self-driving fleets adopt platooning technologies like those from Peleton Technology, allowing trucks to draft behind one another in highway trains.
Trucking represents a considerable portion of the cost of all the goods we buy, so consumers everywhere will experience this change as lower prices and higher standards of living.
In addition, once the technology is mature enough to be rolled out commercially we will also enjoy considerable safety benefits. This year alone more people will be killed in traffic accidents involving trucks than in all domestic airline crashes in the last 45 years combined. At the same time, more truck drivers were killed on the job, 835, than workers in any other occupation in the U.S.
Even putting aside the direct safety risks, truck driving is a grueling job that young people don’t really want to do. The average age of a commercial driver is 55 and rising every year, with projected driver shortages that will create yet more incentive to adopt driverless technology in the years to come .
While the efficiency gains are real—too real to pass up—the technology will have tremendous adverse effects as well. There are currently over 1.6 million Americans working as truck drivers, making it the most common job in 29 states.
The loss of jobs representing 1% of the U.S. workforce will be a devastating blow to the economy. And the adverse consequences won’t end there. Gas stations, highway diners, rest stops, motels, and other businesses catering to drivers will struggle to survive without them.
Last week’s demonstration in Europe shows that driverless trucking is right around the corner.  The primary remaining barriers are regulatory. We still need to create on- and off-ramps so that human drivers can bringtrucks to the freeways where highway autopilot can take over. We may also need dedicated lanes as slow-moving driverless trucks could be a hazard for drivers. These are big projects that can only be done with the active support of government. However, regulators will be understandably reluctant to allow technology with the potential eliminate so many jobs.
Yet the benefits from adopting it will be so huge that we can’t simply outlaw it. A 400% price-performance improvement in ground transportation networks will represent an incredible boost to human well-being. Where would we be if we had banned mechanized agriculture on the grounds that most Americans worked in farming when tractors and harvesters were introduced in the early 20th century?
Amazon opening first Colorado facility in Aurora
E-commerce retailer plans to hire "hundreds" of workers to staff new sortation center
POSTED:   04/25/2016 08:36:09 AM MDT37 COMMENTS| UPDATED:   3 DAYS AGO


Amazon is setting up shop in Colorado
Amazon.com has tapped the city of Aurora and the Majestic Commercenter to park its first Colorado facility.
Located 5 miles south of Denver International Airport, the 452,400-square-foot facility will be a sorting center, where sealed packages arrive and are then sorted by zip code for delivery to local U.S. Post Offices.
"We are hiring for hundreds of associates for our new package sortation center in Aurora," Amazon spokeswoman Ashley S. Robinson confirmed in an e-mail on Monday. She said the new facility is at 19799 E. 36th Drive in Aurora, also known as Building 29 in Majestic Commercenter.
The move comes two months after the Seattle-based online retailer began charging Colorado residents sales tax on their purchases. It fueled speculation that the company had established a business presence in the state.
In a full-page ad in Sunday's Denver Post newspaper, Amazon said it was hiring part-time fulfillment associates for its Aurora facility. The company also created an online Denver job portal, which said future employees would " sort, pack and ship customer orders." The positions start at $13 per hour.
"Aurora's location, workforce and business-friendly environment were key ingredients in attracting in the world's largest e-commerce retailer to our city," Aurora Economic Development Council president and CEO Wendy Mitchell said.
Robinson clarified that these advertised jobs are only for the sorting center. While hiring has begun, no opening date was available, she said.
The Majestic Commercenter is a 1,500-acre business park that also houses hubs for FedEx and the U.S. Postal Service. Majestic Realty last year began construction of Building 29, saying it expected to complete the speculative warehouse and distribution center by Nov. 1, 2015.
After getting stung by UPS shipping delays during the 2013 Christmas season, Amazon began opening intermediary facilities to better control the delivery process. Last year, it also bought a fleet of trailers to move packages between facilities, which helps Amazon rely even less on FedEx, UPS and other carriers.
Amazon also operates large fulfillment centers in more than two dozen states scattered mostly along the coasts.
Since late March, Amazon has announced plans to open at least three more fulfillment centers, each creating 1,000 full-time jobs.
Those include an 800,000-square foot facility near Kansas City in Edgerton, Kansas; a 1 million-square- foot center in Haslet, Texas, north of Fort Worth; and its seventh in California — a 1.1 million-square-foot center in San Bernardino.
Sortation centers tend to be smaller, at around 200,000 to 300,000 square feet, according to logistics consulting firm MWPVL.
But they are also in cities that already have fulfillment centers.
In Kent, Wash., an Amazon sortation center cut delivery time by nine hours so customers could still get two-day delivery if they ordered by 11:59 p.m., instead of the previous 3 p.m., according to a story in The Seattle Times. It also enabled Sunday delivery.
Robinson did not share whether the new Aurora site will also have a nearby fulfillment center, as is the case for Seattle and 15 other sortation locations.
Amazon's expansion into Colorado is "to better serve customers and this facility will enable faster delivery time," Robinson said.
Amazon also posted its first Denver-based job for a logistics manager in February. The job required everything from implementing new technology platforms to having the ability "to lift up to 49 pounds with or without reasonable accommodation."
Several more Denver jobs popped up on Amazon's careers page this month. Most are tech-related and are part of Amazon Web Services, including solutions architectDevOps cloud architect and atechnical trainer.
Holly Shrewsbury, a spokeswoman for the state's Office of Economic Development and International Trade, confirmed that Amazon officials "engaged our office to talk about tax environment and real estate options," she said. But she added that Amazon did not receive any financial incentives to expand in Colorado.
Last November, Majestic Realty Co. acquired 530 acres to expand the business park. The park has 3.5 million square feet in industrial space and the ability to hold 12 million square feet in warehouse and distribution facilities.
At the time, Majestic Realty executive vice president Randy Hertel said "E-commerce is driving the commercial real estate industry in ways we've not seen before. We're seeing greater demand in the 1 million-and-up-square-foot range with land requirements and tenant improvements slightly different than the traditional warehouse and distribution building."
Hertel declined to comment Monday.
The Denver industrial market saw "record levels of development" in the first quarter this year, according to a report by CBRE, a commercial real estate agency.
Approximately 4.4 million square feet of projects are in development, with more than half located near the airport. Construction on industrial projects is 52 percent greater than the previous peak of second quarter 2007. About 80 percent of the activity is speculative, according to CBRE.
A major change between Amazon and its Colorado customers began Feb. 1, when Amazon started collecting sales tax in Colorado. It fueled speculation that the company had established a business presence in the state.
The states where Amazon operates fulfillment centers align with where the company charges sales tax.
On Feb. 5, Amazon was issued a business license in Aurora and filed to collect sales taxes in that city on Feb. 8, according to public filings.
The company's move tax shoppers also came amid developments in 5-year-old lawsuit involving aColorado law that imposes reporting requirements on internet retailers that do not collect sales taxes.
A federal appeals court upheld Colorado's "Amazon Tax," which requires retailers that do not charge sales taxes to track customers' purchases in Colorado, report the taxes that should have been paid to the state and advise buyers of their tax obligations.

However, Amazon instituting sales tax collection may not be a boon for Colorado. Tax revenue limits set by the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights could result in most of the collections from Amazon having to be refunded to taxpayers.

One Regulation Is Painless. A Million of Them Hurt.

868

“In one year,” wrote Warren Meyer in 2015, “I literally spent more personal time on compliance with a single regulatory issue -- implementing increasingly detailed and draconian procedures so I could prove to the State of California that my employees were not working over their 30-minute lunch breaks -- than I did thinking about expanding the business or getting new contracts.”
Meyer is the owner of a company that runs campgrounds and other recreational facilities on public lands under contract from the government. It doesn’t seem like regulatory compliance should be eating up so much of his time; he is not producing toxic chemicals, operating a nuclear facility, or engaged in risky financial transactions that might have the side effect of sending our economy into a tailspin. He’s just renting people places to pitch a tent or park an RV, or selling them sundries. Nonetheless, the government keeps piling on the micromanagement lest some employee, somewhere, miss a lunch break.
I know what you’re going to say: Employees should have lunch breaks! My answer is “Yes, but.…” Yes, but putting the government in charge of ensuring that they get them, and forcing companies to document their compliance, has real costs. They add up.
An economy with but one regulation -- employees must be allowed a 30-minute lunch break, and each company has to document that it has been taken -- would probably not find this much of a drag on growth. But multiply those regulations by thousands, by millions, and you start to have a problem.
new working paper from the Mercatus Center attempts to document the cumulative cost of all these regulations. It finds that the growth of regulation between 1977 and 2012 has shaved about 0.8 percent off the rate of growth, costing the nation a total of $4 trillion worth of GDP.
Stories like Meyer’s are the tangible face of the economic theory. As is the fact that in the annual small business survey by the National Federation of Independent Business, taxes and government red tape are far and away the biggest issues that business owners cite as their most important problems. Forty-three percent of those surveyed cited one of the two as their top issue.
That matters, and not just because of business owners’ headaches. The burden of regulation is not distributed symmetrically. It falls heaviest on firms that deal with dangerous substances, yes. But it also falls most heavily on smaller businesses, which cannot afford staffs of pricey compliance specialists to make sure that their desk chairs meet the new California workplace seating requirements. This may help explain why the number of firms is falling, and markets are consolidating.
Even within those businesses, the burden will tend to be disproportionately concentrated. Employment conditions are heavily regulated, so firms that employ a lot of workers to get a given level of output will have more regulatory overhead. And firms that employ a lot of low-wage labor get hit from every direction: Businesses like fast food and retail tend to have thin profit margins, so they don’t have a lot of room to absorb the extra cost, and they also can’t really cut wages to reflect the higher cost of labor, because they’re already operating at or close to the statutory minimums. A consulting firm that has five employees, on the other hand, will probably have a higher compliance cost per employee, but also much more room in pricing and profit margins to absorb that cost.
How much does this matter? Well, if you want to camp at Meyer’s rec sites, but can’t afford to pay Hilton prices to do so, it probably matters to you a lot. But it also matters to the rest of us, because when you add that burden up, it potentially has big effects:
  1. Regulations can knock the lowest-skilled workers out of the labor force, at which point they’ll struggle to get a better job. It’s fashionable to say that these are terrible jobs anyway: hard labor and they don’t pay enough, so who cares? But those jobs are where people learn the basics of work: showing up on time, being nice to the customer, attending to every detail, and so forth. The regulatory burden is effectively a cost wedge between the amount you pay your worker, and the amount it costs you to employ them; the bigger that wedge, the more likely it is that some people simply won’t be able to find employment. The result is a great human capital loss to the economy, and the devastation of unemployment.
  2. Small businesses are vital to the economy. They’re sort of like the engine oil that lubricates the economy, because a lot of things aren’t profitable at a larger scale. For example, a few years back, I interviewed the owner of a wire basket maker in Baltimore, who was making racks for a car manufacturer to store their parts in on the assembly line. These were a cog in a great industrial enterprise, but he was turning them out in tiny batches -- six at a time, or a dozen. That sort of job simply wouldn’t be profitable for a major manufacturer, because the cost of retooling a big assembly line, and the bureaucratic controls needed to run a large firm, would eat all the profit margin. An owner-operator of a smaller business has a lot more flexibility, and the cushion provided by that flexibility is absolutely necessary.
  3. Regulations can make it unprofitable for small businesses to grow. Let’s say your firm has room to scale, and might even become a big business someday. That’s great! But now we run into the problem of small business carveouts. A lot of laws, including Obamacare, have them, so that politicians can claim their policy won’t affect small firms. The problem is that when you hit one of the thresholds, there is an absurdly high marginal cost to hiring the next employee, or taking in the next dollar of revenue. That can retard growth, which is not something the U.S. can currently spare
All of these costs have to be carefully weighed against the benefits of regulations -- and not just on a regulation-by-regulation basis, as is currently done, if such cost-benefit analysis is done at all. Each hour of a firm’s time that is sucked up by compliance is an hour that is not spent growing the firm, improving the product, better serving the customer. And as the number of the hours so spent increases, and the number of precious hours spent on growth and operations shrinks, each added hour we take is more costly to both the business and to the rest of us. With labor markets lackluster and growth underwhelming, that’s a cost that none of us can well afford.

Containerized shipping turns 60

From its origins in the first seaborne transportation of containers on board Malcolm McLean’s Ideal-X in1956, containerized shipment has become the glue that holds together today’s globalized economy.

By Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor
April 26, 2016
Clarksons Research is reminding logistics managers that container shipping is 60 years old this week.
From its origins in the first seaborne transportation of containers on board Malcolm McLean’s Ideal-X in1956, containerized shipment has become the glue that holds together today’s globalized economy.
Clarksons’ web site takes a look at how the container sector “exploded” into the center ground of the world’s shipping business.
Lighting The Candles
The man acknowledged to have been container shipping’s true pioneer, Malcolm McLean, a trucking magnate, used a converted tanker to move the first containerized cargo by sea from New Jersey to Houston, 60 years ago. Four years later, Sea-Land introduced the first Transatlantic service, and in 1969, in the UK, Overseas Container Lines launched its first service. Landmarks indeed, and the benefits have been widely felt ever since. Containerization enabled the standardization of port handling equipment, increased speed of cargo handling, and flexibility of location of stowage and unpacking which all changed the way that manufactured goods are shipped around the world. It also improved cargo security, and facilitated intermodal integration to provide an inter-connected transportation system.
Pass The Parcels
Today, containerized transport links up just about every corner of the world, even if cargo might need to be transhipped from one vessel or service to another to reach its final destination. Reflecting this, the liner network has seen rapid increases in volumes. Across the last 40 years the compound annual growth rate in global container trade volumes stands at 9%, and this year world box trade is projected to surpass 180 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs).
Following the first 20 years of container shipping history, the next 20, 1977-1996, saw the addition of an estimated 41 million TEU of box trade per annum, and the most recent 20 years have seen the addition of a further massive 136 million TEU of annual loaded container trade.
The network has also provided cheap “per unit” shipping. With around 400 flat screen TV sets in one box, every $100/TEU of freight cost equates to just $25 cents per unit. Given the type of vessels introduced, per TEU costs of operating ships have dropped too. Across 1976-96, three million TEU of capacity was delivered, with an average ship size of 1,673 TEU. In 1997-2016, 20 million TEU was delivered with an average size of 4,363 TEU, taking today’s fleet capacity to 19.9 million TEU.
Icing On The Cake
So, while growing up, container shipping has been busy connecting the world via the liner network for the movement of goods in a speedy and secure fashion. Though partially separating vessel ownership and operation, it has enabled cheap door-to-door transportation of manufactured goods, and the connection of consumers with the lowest cost production locations, facilitating the great outsourcing boom and enabling multi-location processing. Supply chains have been optimized and specialist port infrastructure has been established and connected to the distribution network.
All in all, containerization has been one of the greatest facilitators of change in the world economy in the last century.

The Rise of the Logistics M&A Mega Deal

hands-1063442_960_720As well as 2015 being the warmest year since records began (in 1850), it was also pretty hot 12 months in the area of business mergers and acquisitions, which hit a new high of $4.3 trillion in deals struck. Specifically in the logistics industry, several so-called mega deals led to a near year-on-year doubling of M&A value to $173 billion, according to data from PwC.
Prominent among the 2015 deals: FedEx’s $4.8 billion grab for TNT; XPO Logistics’ acquisitions of Norbert Dentressangle ($3.5 billion) and Con-Way ($3 billion); Japan Post’s $5.1 billion purchase of Australia’s Toll Group; and Kintetsu World Express buying Singapore’s APL Logistics for $1.2 billion from shipping line owner NOL, which was itself bought out a few months later by France’s CMA CGM in a $2.4 billion deal.
At the recent LogiSYM conference here in Singapore, and with reference to this highly active backdrop, I explored the logistics M&A landscape and the mechanics of deal making together with an expert panel. The following Q&A summary highlights the main discussion points and useful learnings during the session.
Q: Why are we seeing this heightened M&A activity in the logistics industry?
A: As well as existing 3PLs looking to increasing scale and searching for growth by getting into emerging markets and expanding the served base of industry sectors, the extent of margin compression in the industry – the value of world trade declined by 14 percent in 2015 – is pushing consolidation. Interest rates are still low by historical standards and private equity firms are increasingly being drawn to the sector, especially when they see some of the high valuations applied to logistics companies.
Q: How should a company go about evaluating potential merger or acquisition candidates?
A: It has to be driven by strategy. Are you looking for market extension, customer acquisition, to take out competition, access to skills or intellectual property? Define what size of company you need to make a difference and search for targets that meet the criteria. In the screening process, identify companies that can offer realistic growth in terms of delivering free cashflow if not immediately then at least at some point in the future.
Is the candidate a cultural fit? It may look great in terms of having all the right trade lanes, warehouses and transportation assets, for example, but if the culture is not compatible with yours it is going to be very difficult to make it work.
And because mergers and acquisitions can often get complex and emotional, at every step of the deal process it’s important to remind yourself why you are doing this, what is the desired outcome, and what should look this look like in a few years’ time? There are examples in the logistics industry of certain companies being “deal junkies”, expending energy on making deals rather than on analyzing whether they make strategic sense.
Q: Post-deal integration is a frequent and notorious stumbling block to M&A success. What can be done to smooth the critical integration process?
A: Especially for an acquiree, it is inevitable that the initial reaction will center around uncertainty – what is going to happen to my company and how will I be affected?  So you need put out information, preferably at a personal level, about why the business is being sold, explaining any new terms and conditions resulting from the deal, and if there are going to be retrenchments, these need to be spoken about sooner rather than later.
If you are the acquirer, it’s worth remembering that there is likely to be a lot of smart people as well as systems and processes in the company that you’re buying, so look to get the best out of both businesses. This will also help in the integration process as people appreciate the efforts of combining the strengths of two companies. People often forget there’s also nervousness on this side of the deal – you’ve just spent millions or even billions of dollars and you need to show success.
Often when it does happen, breakdown in execution occurs in the second to fourth tiers of management with individuals who were probably not involved in the visionary deal making and may have not fully bought into the idea. So it’s really critical to get these people on board because otherwise they will not communicate appropriately with their reports (don’t assume HR is going to do this job) and the integration will be affected. If they still do not come on board and whether it’s the acquirer or acquiree, it is better to let them exit at an early stage.
Q: Is the trend of logistics industry M&As set to continue and in what likely form?
A: Yes, deals are going to continue over the next few years. Driven by necessity as margins continue to fall, there is still room for consolidation in the industry and at least three or four of the top 50 companies are engaged in discussions right now. Money coming out of Asia, especially China, to buy developed market assets is likely to be a rising phenomenon. And as well as more small and mid-sized M&As, the last mile fulfilment and the logistics technology and software sectors will see increasing deal activity.
In addition, against a backdrop of disruption and transformation in other industries, don’t be surprised to see some ambitious, game changing moves involving new entrants with deep pockets. Amazon’s recently announced (March 9) investment in Air Transport Services Group (ATSG) so that it can run its own cargo delivery operation flying 20 used Boeing 767 freighters could be a harbinger of what lies ahead.

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Once Bustling Trade Ports in Asia and Europe Lose Steam

From Shanghai to Hamburg, container-shipping industry is gripped by economic undertow

Empty storage racks at a Shanghai warehouse last year. Once bustling trade routes and ports are falling quiet as the flow of goods slows between Asia and Europe.ENLARGE
Empty storage racks at a Shanghai warehouse last year. Once bustling trade routes and ports are falling quiet as the flow of goods slows between Asia and Europe.PHOTO: JOHANNES EISELE/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES
At a logistics park bordering Shanghai’s port last month, the only goods stored in a three-story warehouse were high-end jeans, T-shirts and jackets imported from the U.K. and Hong Kong, most of which had sat there for nearly two years.
Business at the 108,000-square-foot floor warehouse dwindled at the end of 2015 after several Chinese wine importers pulled out, said Yang Ying, the warehouse keeper, leaving lots of empty space. The final blow came after a merchant turned away a shipment in December at the dock.
“The client told the ship hands, just take the wine back to France,” Ms. Yang said. “Nobody wants it.”
Pain is increasing among the world’s biggest ports—from Shanghai to Hamburg—amid weaker growth in global trade and a calamitous end to a global commodities boom. Overall trade rose just 2.8% in 2015, according to the World Trade Organization, the fourth consecutive year below 3% growth and historically weak compared with global economic expansion.
The ancient business of ship-borne trade has been whipsawed, first by a boom that demanded more and bigger vessels, and more recently by an abrupt slowing. That turnabout has roiled the container-shipping industry, which transports more than 95% of the world’s goods, from clothes and shoes to car parts, electronic and handbags. It has set off a frenzy of consolidation and costs cutting across the world’s fleets.
On Friday, the Hong Kong Marine Department reported throughput for its port in the first quarter was off 11% from the first three months of last year. Throughput for all of 2015 also dropped 11%.Ashore, it is also slamming ports and port operators, the linchpin to global commerce. Nowhere is the carnage more painful than along the Europe-Asia trade route, measuring roughly 28,000 miles round trip. A cooling Chinese economy and a high-profile crackdown by Beijing on corruption has damped demand for everything from commodities like iron ore to designer scarves and shoes. Meanwhile, Europe’s still sputtering recovery from the global economic crisis is hitting the flow of goods in the other direction.
“It is the first time you see people in shipping being really scared,” said Basil Karatzas, of New York-based Karatzas Marine Advisors and Co.
Chinese imports from the European Union fell nearly 14% in 2015. Chinese exports to Europe were down 3%. This year isn’t starting any better. In the first quarter, Chinese imports from the EU fell 7% from a year earlier, a decline matched by exports to Europe.
Jonathan Roach, a container-shipping analyst at London-based Braemar-ACM Shipbroking, said some 100 Asia-to-Europe sailings were canceled last year, or 10% of regularly scheduled voyages on the route.
“Drastic fleet management strategies have been implemented by liner operators to reduce their exposure on oversupplied Asia-Europe trades,” Mr. Roach said.
ENLARGE
Last November, Maersk Line, the world’s biggest container operator, said it would lay off 4,000 employees and pushed back new ship orders to weather collapsing freight rates. In Asia, South Korean shippersHyundai Merchant Marine andHanjin Shipping Co. are in talks with creditor Korea Development Bank to restructure debts.
There are many reasons for the global slowdown, including a yearslong commodities-price rout, generally slower growth in Asia and an anemic recovery in much of Europe. Economic and political crises have roiled big markets, including Russia, Ukraine and Brazil. And policy makers blame a dearth of big trade deals, like Nafta, which have spurred big global trade gains in the past.
Not everyone is suffering. U.S. ports from Los Angeles to New York are pursuing expansions in anticipation of higher volumes, thanks to a relatively robust American economy. But even in those ports, retailers are sitting on large amounts of unsold goods, and could cut back on ordering more from overseas if inventories don’t come down.
At the biggest ports in Asia and Europe, there are few signs of a near-term rebound. Last year, Shanghai International Port (Group) Co., China’s top port, handled more containers, but total cargo fell to 513 million tons, down 5% from 2014. Through March this year, volumes were down 4% from the year-earlier period.
Willy Lin, chairman of the Hong Kong Shippers’ Council, said car parts imported from Europe and assembled in China fell by at least 13% by volume in 2015. Shipments of luxury goods, including high-end clothes, shoes and apparel, from Europe were down around 15% last year.
“It is 30% fewer boxes coming in and around 10% [fewer] going out” of Chinese ports, Mr. Lin said.
The pain is just as bad in Europe. A recent study by the European Shippers’ Council, which represents around 25,000 exporters and importers, found a 12% decrease in Northern European port calls by all shipping lines between the second half of 2014 and the second half of last year. The study showed a doubling of skipped port calls between Europe and Asia over the same period.
You can see it at the docks, which at times are empty.
Fernanda Van Opstal, APM Terminals
At the Belgian port of Zeebrugge, a major European transshipment hub for container ships and dry-bulk vessels, cargo volumes have dropped to less than half over the past 15 months.
“You can see it at the docks, which at times are empty,” said Fernanda Van Opstal, a sales manager in Zeebrugge for port operator APM Terminals, owned by Danish shipping giant A.P. Moeller-Maersk A/S.
Ms. Van Opstal said exports to China, including timber, fertilizers, metal and plastic scrap, and heavy machinery, continue, but volumes over the past year are down by up to 30% in most categories. So-called “Triple E” vessels, the world’s largest container-carrying ships, are coming and going less frequently, and often less than full.
In Hamburg, Europe’s third-busiest port behind Rotterdam and Antwerp, container traffic with China fell last year to its lowest since 2009. Klaus-Dieter Peters, chief executive of Hamburger Hafen und Logistik AG, which runs three out of the four container terminals in Hamburg, blames China’s slowing economy and the crises in Russia and Ukraine.
Cranes at the Yangshan Port Container Terminal in Shanghai late last year. ENLARGE
Cranes at the Yangshan Port Container Terminal in Shanghai late last year. PHOTO: DING TING/XINHUA/ZUMA PRESS
“The challenging environment…was felt particularly in seaborne container handling,” he said. HHLA’s container throughput fell 13% in 2015.
At the Zhanghuabang Terminal in Shanghai, near the mouth of the Yangtze River, roads are lined with idle trucks, with chain-smoking drivers waiting for loads. Inside the terminal on a recent afternoon, 45-year-old driver Sun Shihong was helping other workers unload half-ton, U-shaped coil units made by Shanghai Electric Group for use at power plants
In 2010, Mr. Sun said the company was using more than 40 trucks, each of which made the run between the factory and the port three times a day.
“I earned 12,000 yuan (about $1,850) a month three years ago,” he said. “And now, 6,000 yuan to 7,000 yuan.”