Archives for category: economic

Despite the many domestic and market challenges facing the Hellenic ship owning community, Greece has continued to strengthen its position as the largest ship owning nation in recent years. As the shipping community begins to gather for another Posidonia, Greek owners today control some 18% of the world fleet, with a 333m dwt fleet on the water and a further 40m dwt on order.

Greek owners continue to top the league table of ship owning nations with a 196m GT fleet and global market share of 16% (by GT), followed by Japan (13%), China (11%) and Germany (7%). In recent years this position has in fact been consolidated, with the Greek fleet growing by over 7% in 2015 – the most significant growth of all major owning nations. Aggregate growth since 2009 is even more significant; some 70% in tonnage terms. The big loser in market share in recent years has been Germany, while China’s aggressive growth in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis has slowed (the Chinese fleet doubled between 2009 and 2012 as solutions were found to distressed shipyard orders). Athens/Piraeus also features as the largest owning cluster globally, with Tokyo, Hamburg, Singapore and Hong Kong/Shenzhen making up the top five.

Punching Above Their Weight!

Greek owners remain the classic “cross traders”, developing their market leading position as the bulk shipping system evolved in the second-half of the twentieth century. Today, the Greek owners’ share of the world fleet at 16% compares to a seaborne trade share for Greece of less than 1%. By contrast, Chinese owners control 11% of the world fleet relative to the Chinese economy contributing to 16% of seaborne trade.

Sticking With Wet And Dry

Although a number of Greek owners have diversified into other shipping sectors, Greek owners have generally retained a focus on the “wet” and “dry” sectors. Today, the Greek fleet is largely made up of bulkcarriers (47% by GT) and tankers (35%) with this combined share hovering around 85% for most of the past twenty years. There has been some development of the Greek owned containership fleet (up to an 11% share) and gas carriers (up to a 4% share) but this is still generally limited. By contrast, Norwegian owners have trended towards more specialised vessels (e.g. offshore, car carriers) and the German fleet has remained liner focused.


Asset Players

Greek owners have also retained their role as shipping’s leading asset players and today operate a fleet with a value of some $91 billion (actually third in the rankings behind the US due to the value weighting of the cruise fleet). In 2015, Greek owners were the number one buyers (followed by China) and number one sellers (followed by Japan and Germany) in the sale and purchase market. Greeks have not been quite so dominant in the newbuild market recently and in 2015, Greek owners ($6.9bn of orders) trailed Japan ($13.1bn) and China ($10.7bn) in the investment rankings.

So despite facing many challenges, Greek owners continue to “punch above their weight” as the world’s leading shipowners for yet another year!

SIW1223

Container shipping is 60 years old next week. From its origins in the first seaborne transportation of containers on board Malcolm McLean’s Ideal-X on 26 April 1956, containerized shipment has become the glue that holds together today’s globalised economy. This week’s Analysis takes a look at how the container sector exploded into the centre 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, back in 1956. 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 180m TEU. As the graph shows, following the first 20 years of container shipping history, the next 20, 1977-1996, saw the addition of an estimated 41m TEU of box trade per annum, and the most recent 20 years have seen the addition of a further massive 136m 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, 3m TEU of capacity was delivered, with an average ship size of 1,673 TEU. In 1997-2016, 20m TEU was delivered with an average size of 4,363 TEU, taking today’s fleet capacity to 19.9m TEU

Icing On The Cake

So, whilst 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. Whilst 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 optimised 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. Happy birthday to you, container shipping!

SIW1218

As the pace of growth in Chinese seaborne imports has slowed, and prospects for a return to stronger rates of expansion appear to have diminished, focus on the potential for other countries to help provide impetus to global seaborne trade growth has increased. With an economy expanding at a robust pace, and a population close to China’s, India has increasingly featured in the spotlight.

The Big Bang

China’s dramatic growth and increased raw material demand since the turn of the century propelled world seaborne trade to new heights. By 2014, China’s imports of dry bulk goods, crude oil and oil products reached 1,850mt, 1,600mt more than in 2000. China’s industry-led development saw unparalleled growth in steel output, whilst refinery capacity and coal imports surged. But with coal demand and steel output falling, imports stalled in 2015.

A Dimmer Light?

This rapid expansion in China’s imports occurred fairly quickly, and comparison to a ‘base year’ shows that Indian imports are tracking behind China’s progression. In 2000, China’s GDP per capita stood at US$1,000, and the country’s dry bulk and oil imports topped 200mt. India reached both of these milestones in 2007, and since then, Indian imports have risen by 280mt to around 500mt, compared to China’s 950mt of extra imports between 2000 and 2009. Differing political systems and economies have clearly proved key. Industry accounts for a greater share of China’s GDP than India’s, whilst 25% of growth in the value of India’s trade in the last ten years (in both goods and services) was accounted for by the service sector, compared to 12% for China.

Reaching For The Stars

The concern for some shipping sectors is that the pace of growth in India’s import volumes already appears to be slowing, partly as targets for thermal coal self-sufficiency have undermined coal imports since mid-2015. Meanwhile, India is aiming to become a ‘global manufacturing hub’, with ambitious targets to treble steel production capacity to 300mt by 2025. However, the steel industry globally is currently under severe stress, and it is also unclear to what extent output growth may boost iron ore imports given India’s domestic ore reserves.

What Do The Skies Hold?

Nevertheless, India seems to hold plenty of potential in some areas. The outlook for imports of coking coal, crude oil and oil products still appears positive. And at a macro level, in 2015, India’s dry bulk and oil imports represented 0.4 tonnes per capita, below the global average of 1.0 tonnes per capita. Bringing India towards this level could generate significant additional import volumes.

So, the stars don’t seem to be in a hurry to line up Indian imports for growth on this explosive scale for now, with coal imports likely to fall further. But this may not be the end of the story. Growth in India’s refinery capacity, steel production, GDP and population looks set to outpace China’s in the coming years. Whilst Indian imports may not dazzle in some areas as brightly as China’s have, the shipping industry will still be hoping they may provide some sparkle in others.

SIW1217

The volatility of the shipping markets has always presented opportunities and pitfalls for investors (see SIW 1210). Getting the timing right is key, and newbuilding decisions can prove especially difficult given the need to look further forwards into the future – always a tricky task. The challenging state of many shipping markets suggests that owners have struggled to find the right balance when planning ahead.

Changeable Winds

Accurately forecasting future shipping market developments is clearly fraught with difficulties. Owners making newbuild investments may be renewing their fleets, or building for dedicated business, but for those ordering more speculatively, the investment might reflect expectations of future demand and market conditions.

These trends are hard to predict. Economic and political developments, amongst many others, can shift quickly and change trade patterns. Combined with supply factors such as newbuild pricing or finance availability, it is easy to see how the volume of tonnage ordered can be misaligned with the requirement.

Clouds Gathering

Comparing historical contracting to the volume of ‘required’ deliveries shows that investment has frequently ‘overshot’ the need for additional ships. In 2003 for example, global contracting totalled 117m dwt. Assuming that these ships take two years to be delivered, trends in 2005 could indicate whether this level of ordering was lower than or surplus to requirement. Global demolition totalled 6m dwt in 2005, and world seaborne trade grew by 4.5%, which based on estimated fleet productivity in 2003, could have required an extra 42m dwt of tonnage to transport. So ordering in 2003 may have been 70m dwt greater than the estimated volume of deliveries needed in 2005. The surplus was even greater in 2007, when 275m dwt was ordered, but with seaborne trade dropping by 3.7% in 2009, there was no ‘requirement’ for any additional tonnage to be delivered that year.

Gusts From The East

Since 2000, more years than not have seen ‘excess’ ships ordered. After the financial crisis hit, surplus capacity led to weaker markets and changes in productivity, such as slow steaming. Ordering in 2009-12 was closer to estimated ‘requirement’, but surged to 178m dwt in 2013, with hope in some sectors that the bottom of the cycle had been reached.

Yet 2015 saw seaborne trade growth slow to 2.1%, led by trends in China. With 39m dwt scrapped in 2015, and an estimated 36m dwt needed to ship the additional trade volumes, ordering in 2013 could have ‘overshot’ by 100m dwt, exerting further supply pressures.

An Unsettled Climate

The story clearly varies across sectors, but shipping investors seem an optimistic bunch, and are now being let down by underperformance of seaborne trade. At times, this optimism has raised demand for shipyard capacity, but has still created a surplus, with lower ordering in 2014-15 still possibly excess to requirement based on current projections. In such a changeable climate as shipping, it’s clear that checking the forecast is vital, but it seems that getting a clear view ahead is hard.

SIW1211

The recycling market has started 2016 with a bang, with a huge volume of tonnage heading to demolition facilities. Many of the key shipping markets continue to be in a state of very ill health, and owners seem to be rushing to the emergency room. But with such a youthful global fleet on the water, how might this next episode of shipping’s medical drama play out?

Off To The Infirmary

So far this year, around 8m dwt of tonnage has been reported recycled – a dramatic start, and one which suggests that 2016 could be another very strong year for demolition, after a total of 39m dwt was recycled in 2015. A quick check-up on the age profile of the world fleet shows that despite the obvious youthful bias, there is still some elderly tonnage in operation; 6% of global dwt capacity (or 112m dwt) is aged 25 years or over. However, only around one third of this amount is accounted for by the three major volume sectors, an unfortunate circumstance given the degree to which two key patients, the bulkcarrier and containership sectors, are currently suffering.

Seeking Medicine

The delivery boom over the last decade has meant that the fleet in these two sectors is very young – the average bulkcarrier is less than 9 years old. Following elevated levels of scrapping since the start of the downturn, there is now only 23m dwt of bulker tonnage left aged 25 years or more (3% of the fleet), while only 2% of boxship fleet capacity is over 25 years old – a seemingly limited relief valve.

However, the distressed market conditions are leading to younger ships being scrapped. In 2012, the bulkcarriers scrapped were aged 28 years on average, but this fell to 25 years in 2015, and 23 years in January 2016 (reaching just 20 years in the Capesize sector). For the last few years, containerships have been scrapped at an average age of 23 years, but so far in 2016 this figure has fallen to just 19 years.

Prescribing Steel Therapy

The apparent willingness to demolish more youthful ships could have the potential to eventually underpin a more positive supply-demand balance. More ships were delivered (see graph) in 1992-96 (vessels now aged 20-24 years) than in 1987-91 (ships now 25-29 years old), and only a third of tonnage delivered in 1992-96 has since been removed. Deliveries rose further past 1997, so the share of fleet capacity aged 15 years or more rises to 18% in both the bulker and containership sectors – a greater volume offering a wider range of scrapping candidates. Owners seem to have been making use of this treatment option. Since the start of 2015, 37% of bulker tonnage and 42% of boxship capacity scrapped has been less than 20 years old.

What’s The Prognosis?

So, there’s plenty of capacity which can be recycled if owners can swallow the pill of selling less elderly units. With a strong dosage of demolition, bulk fleet growth could fall below 2% this year, and supply-side fundamentals in the boxship charter market sector should remain supportive. Firm demolition is far from a cure to the challenges faced, but it could be a way to limit some of the worst symptoms.

SIW1209

With tanker owners “on top of the world” and their dry bulk counterparts often feeling like they are “staring into the abyss”, 2015 was a year of contrasting fortunes across bulk shipping. However with global seaborne trade growth slowing to 2% (to reach 10.7bn tonnes) and the world fleet growing at 3% (to reach 1.8bn dwt), for many sectors it has been a case of the fundamentals working against them.

SIW1204

Onwards And Upwards

The good news or the bad? Well let’s start with the good! There is no doubt who stole the show in 2015, with average tanker earnings up 73% y-o-y and VLCCs leading the way, up 120% with earnings spiking over $100,000/day. Low oil prices drove demand (total seaborne oil trade grew 4.8% to 2.9bn tonnes), supporting the best tanker market since 2008. Indeed, with a tanker fleet around 30% bigger than during the last market spike, the approximate earnings flow into the sector topped $42bn, the second highest year on record after 2008 ($46bn).

Sitting Pretty

Although tankers had a sparkling year, VLGCs managed to outdo even their stellar performance of 2014, with average earnings increasing to over $85,000/day! LPG was also the top performing trade, with an estimated 8% increase (with US exports up over 30% to around 16mt). The specialised products market made steady gains, as did the ro-ro, ferry and cruise markets. Elsewhere however, it was difficult to avoid a sinking feeling.

That Sinking Feeling!

Having spent the years since the financial crisis worrying about supply, dry bulk owners seemed to “get the message” with an 87% increase in demolition and an 74% drop in ordering. 93 demolished Capesizes represented an all time record, and bulkcarrier fleet growth of 2.7% was the slowest since 2003. However the reality of the “new economic normal” in China (where coal imports dropped 28% and iron ore imports managed just 1% growth) meant that seaborne dry bulk trade stalled at 4.7bn tonnes. Average earnings fell 28%, but in the final months of the year, earnings sat at OPEX levels and reached well publicised all time lows.

Buyers & Sellers…

Despite the rush to beat NOx Tier III regulations, newbuilding orders across tankers and bulkers totalled 65m dwt, down 32% year-on-year. Overall yard orders totalled 96m dwt ($70bn), down 21%, with busy ordering of large containerships in the first six months of the year. The average lead time for orders however dropped to 22 months and the immediate outlook is quiet. We reported 67m dwt of tanker and bulker sales in 2015, down on 2014, especially for tankers (-34%). Asset prices were relatively steady in tankers but unsurprisingly down 30-40% in dry, with buyers increasingly selective towards good spec tonnage. Greek owners again topped the asset play charts, involved in nearly 50% of all reported tanker and bulker deals either as buyers or sellers. Meanwhile, scrap prices nearly halved, as global steel prices fell.

Poles Apart?

So, it was a year of contrasting fortunes across wet and dry (we estimate the largest earnings differential on record!), but a tough year for most across shipping (look out for our review of the container market next week and our offshore review in Offshore Intelligence Monthly for more depressing numbers!). Perhaps 2016 may be a case of “opposites attract”, with those tanker owners sitting on the top of the world eyeing up a bottoming out dry cycle. Have a nice New Year!

In the nativity story, the three ‘Wise Men’ each come bearing a gift for the baby Jesus. Today, gifts are more likely to have been transported by containership than by camel, but the boxship market itself has still been subject to a number of demand-side ‘humps’ this year. Unwrapping these trends suggests three rather unwelcome ‘gifts’ that the containership market has received in 2015.

Gifts From The East

Prior to the last 7 years, container trade growth had been rapid, averaging 9.6% per annum in 1996 to 2007 – an astonishing performance given the average 4.1% per annum expansion in global seaborne trade in the same period. Box trade flourished, as further cargoes were containerised and manufacturing was rapidly outsourced from the west to Asia (particularly in the 2000s). Container shipping became the planet’s chosen (low cost) way for moving general cargo around. The first major blip in the story was in 2009, when box trade fell for the first time in the history of containerisation, dropping 10% on the back of the global economic downturn. 2015 currently looks set to be the worst year since then, with trade growth expected to reach just 2.5%.

Hardly Gold

Three key factors have driven slower trade growth this year. The first is the contraction of the key Far East-Europe trade, reflecting a combination of the weak euro, continued challenging economic conditions in some European nations, and a stark fall in Russian volumes. It seems that this year has also seen some inventory de-stocking, bolstering the downward trend. Peak leg Far East-Europe trade is projected to drop by 3.8% in 2015, limiting total expansion in mainlane trade to around 0.4% this year.

The second factor has been the slowdown in the estimated rate of growth in intra-Asian volumes. This is an important bloc of container trade (around 50m teu) and has been one of the fastest growing parts in recent years. This year, the turbulence and slowing rate of growth in the Chinese economy, combined with issues in other Asian economies, has seen the estimated rate of intra-Asian growth slow in 2015, with total intra-regional trade now projected to grow by 3.6% this year, down from 6.0% in 2014.

Looking Myrrh-ky

Thirdly, the collapse in commodity prices, including crude oil, has had a heavily deleterious impact on box volumes into economies particularly dependent on commodity exports for income. Notably, growth in box imports into economies in Africa and South America have slowed, and total North-South trade is now expected to grow by only 1.8% this year, whilst Middle Eastern imports are also coming under pressure.

Frankly Incensed

So the world of container trade has indeed received three ‘gifts’ this year, but the outcome for containership demand has not been a joyful story. The Christmas season is usually prime time for thoughts of presents shipped by container around the world, but it seems that the boxship sector may have to wait beyond this year’s festivities to find a brighter-looking star on the horizon.

SIW1202

Once upon a time, in Germanic languages the number 1,200 represented ‘the long thousand’ and was a traditional way of measuring large numbers. Well, today Shipping Intelligence Weekly is 1,200 issues old, and that seems like a long time indeed. How have the shipping markets fared in that time and what do the ‘long cycles’ show when the ‘SIW era’ is split into parts?

A Long, Long Time Ago

The 1,199 previous editions of SIW (stretching over 22 years back to 1992) provide us with a huge amount of useful historical data, including the ClarkSea Index, our weekly indicator measuring the health of earnings in the four main shipping markets. There are many ways in which the history of the index can be analysed but one interesting view can be generated by lining up historical ‘cycles’. The graph featured here shows the result of lining up two periods of 400 SIW issues (about 8 years each) and comparing them to the performance of the index over 300 issues (6 years) since then. What this seems to tell us is that after 300 issues of the first two cycles something pretty dramatic happens!

Moving Along

Looking at the first period, issues 100-400 don’t show a great deal of variation in terms of what was to follow. Between January 1994 and December 1999 the index peaked at $15,149/day and the lowest point was $8,679/day. However, following issue 400, the index took off, peaking at $24,395/day in early 2001, before crashing back down later in the year to $8,877/day by December 2001 as the dotcom bubble collapsed, and the impact of problems in Asia and 9/11 were felt by the global economy.

A Long Time Coming

The second period really illustrates shipping’s great ‘super-boom’. Just prior to issue 500, China joined the WTO and global trade took off. On the back of rapid demand growth driven by Asia, the index headed up from around $9,000/day in late 2001 to a record peak of $50,701/day in December 2007, bang on issue 800! This time the cycle held on past 300 issues and the peak was almost regained in May 2008, but drama was just around the corner in the form of the ‘Credit Crunch’. By April 2009 the index had plummeted to $7,442/day.

How Long Will It Go On?

The last 300 issues have seen the ‘long downturn’ with substantial deliveries of new capacity and the index stuck between $20,681/day and $7,520/day (a bit like the 1990s). Despite the index surpassing $18,000/day this year there’s been no sustained respite from the downturn yet, and as of issue 1,199 (last week) the index had fallen back to $13,348/day.

Won’t Stop For Long

So, the previous two periods definitely offered up drama after 300 issues. Today, we’re at a crossroads again. Supply growth looks to be under some degree of control at last but the big story of 2015 has been the erosion of demand side growth with seaborne trade expansion slowing to around 2%. There are a range of possible scenarios but one thing is for sure: nothing stops for long in shipping.

OIMT201511

It’s now more than a year since the tanker market took off. In mid-2014 tanker earnings picked up and since then have been in the $30-$40,000/day range. But the market remains nervous. This tanker pick-up coincided with a slump in dry bulk earnings, which is interesting because on paper bulkers and tankers both seem to have surplus capacity. So why are tankers doing so much better than bulkers?

Long-Term Premium

On an “all sizes average” basis tanker earnings generally exceed bulker earnings (the tanker “basket” contains a greater share of larger ships). For example, between 1990 and 2015 to date tanker earnings averaged $24,996/day, whilst bulkers earned $13,933/day. That gives tankers a 79% premium over bulkers. During the seven years since the Credit Crisis, the premium has remained. Tankers have earned $18,281/day, compared to bulkers’ $12,427/day, a 47% premium. So the “premium” relationship held, even during a period of deep recession.

Earnings Distribution

However, during the period of recession tanker earnings have swung from below to above “average premium levels”. To illustrate this point we have estimated what tanker earnings “should have been” over the last seven years if they had followed the “average premium” relationship with bulker earnings over the full period back to 1990. This relationship was estimated using a regression equation as a “rule of thumb”, using monthly data for the period 1990 to 2015, and then used to estimate tanker earnings since 2009 from bulker earnings, shown by the red line on the graph.

For the first five years tankers underperformed compared to the long-term “average premium” versus bulkers, with the blue line, showing actual earnings, below the red line. But in 2014 they started to exceed the expected premium as bulker earnings dropped and tanker earnings increased. Currently tanker earnings offer a significant “bonus” above the estimated “norm”, at levels about six times higher than bulker earnings.

More Than One Answer

So what’s going on? The first answer is that tankers are playing “catch up” for the bad run early in the recession. But there are other answers to the question. One is that in 2015 oil trade has grown much faster than expected, increasing by 4% compared with only 2% expected earlier in the year. Another is the oil price collapse from over $100/bbl to close to $40/bbl, creating an opportunity for arbitrage by holding oil in ships, in anticipation of a price increase. Additionally, of course, bulkers have suffered from an absence of demand growth this year.

The Usual Suspects?

So there you have it. The tanker boom has gone on longer than many might have anticipated and tanker earnings are outperforming their long-run relationship with bulker earnings. But a “fundamental” surplus remains and investors might be right to be cautious. Scrapping has almost stopped, ordering has picked up and supply growth is set to increase. So, enjoy it while you can, and remember that it’s partly a game of catch up. Have a nice day.

SIW201511

Motoring terminology has always provided shipping analysts with a wide range of vocabulary to use when describing the car carrier sector. Last year demand growth appeared to have stalled, and the indicators suggest that there hasn’t been a significant acceleration this year. With the market improvements seen back in late 2013 now seemingly eroded, what are the signs on the road today?

Trade Growth Stalling

In some ways the signals are quite clear. The road has hardly been smooth for seaborne car trade in recent years. Volumes have yet to surpass the record level of an estimated 28.5m cars in 2007, with total trade in 2015 expected to total 26.7m cars. Trade fell by more than 30% in 2009, and while volumes have recovered to some extent, and increased by a helpful 4-6% per annum in 2011-13, growth in 2014 ground to a halt. Relocation of car production limited shipments from key Asian exporters, while imports into a number of key and emerging regions were affected by economic and political disruptions.

Similar trends have imposed a ‘speed limit’ on car trade growth this year, with volumes only on track to increase by around 1% in 2015. Strong car sales in the US and Europe have helped to drive some growth, but continued expansion of vehicle output close to major and developing demand centres, combined with economic difficulties significantly limiting imports into China, Brazil and Russia, has prevented further acceleration.

Down In A Low Gear

Meanwhile, growth in the PCC (Pure Car Carrier, including Pure Car & Truck Carrier) fleet has also decelerated in recent years, easing from 5% in capacity terms in 2013 to 2% in 2014. While the majority of car carriers operate under long-term agreements, the market is still impacted by supply and demand trends, and the slowdown in fleet growth appears, with demand looking lacklustre, to have been insufficient to prevent weaker fundamentals. Charter rates for a 6,500 ceu PCTC had improved in late 2013 and into 2014, topping $26,000/day in mid-2014. However they have since come under pressure and sentiment has become more negative during 2015.

Alternative Routes?

On the investment side, however, the indicators might be suggesting something else. Following limited ordering of new car carrier capacity in 2014, owners have put their foot down and in the first ten months of 2015 ordered units of 0.25m car equivalent capacity, more than in six of the last seven years. Replacement demand appears to have driven much of this, but there has been plenty of activity at the top end of the size range, so clearly some owners still think ‘big is beautiful’ and that the road ahead seems clear.

The Traffic Report

So, the car carrier sector may have hit a rather big jam. But down another road, there’s still plenty of traffic flow. Slow lane or fast, this all needs further examination, and each year, in our Car Carrier Trade & Transport report, we look at the trends in detail. This year’s report is available on the Shipping Intelligence Network now. Have a nice day.

SIW201511