DOCSLIB.ORG

Investor Presentation – Full Year Results 2015

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Investor Presentation – Full Year Results 2015 Investor Presentation – Full Year Results 2015 123 -24 March 2016 Disclaimer Forward-looking Statements This presentation contains forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Such statements are based on a number of assumptions, estimates, projections or plans that are inherently subject to significant risks, as well as uncertainties and contingencies that are subject to change. Actual results can differ materially from those anticipated in the Company´s forward-looking statements as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, including those set forth from time to time in the Company´s press releases and reports and those set forth from time to time in the Company´s analyst calls and discussions. We do not assume any obligation to update the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation. This presentation does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation or offer to buy any securities of the Company, and no part of this presentation shall form the basis of or may be relied upon in connection with any offer or commitment whatsoever. This presentation is being presented solely for your information and is subject to change without notice. 2 Opening remarks Our deliverables We made very good progress and delivered what we promised Our industry The market is tough, but there are some encouraging signs Our position Hapag-Lloyd is well positioned to be successful in the future Our track record Hapag-Lloyd achieved its ambitious earnings targets in 2015 Our objectives Hapag-Lloyd will remain a strong Top 5 player in the future 3 Our deliverables Our industry Our position Our track record Hapag-Lloyd look back on 2015 Our objectives $ 2015 2016 March October 2015 2016 New CCO Inclusion in SDAX June 2015 (Thorsten Structural Haeser) February 2016 improvements Debt repricing 2 x wide-beam announced (interest ships acquired reduced) January 2016 July 2015 Compete to September 2015 December 7 x 9,300 TEU Win roll-out Integration 2015 ships delivered of CSAV OCTAVE 2 New coopera- completed launched tion in Latin B2/positive USD 125 m America outlook from early bond 16 „Old Ladies“ Moody‘s redemption retired B+/stable August 2015 outlook from November 2015 March 2015 April 2015 6,000 reefer S&P Successful IPO New CFO 5 x 10.500 TEU containers (USD 300 m (Nicolás Burr) ships ordered acquired primary) 4 Our deliverables Our industry Our position Our track record Strategic highlights: We have achieved a lot in 2015… Our objectives Integration of CSAV1) completed in Q3 2015 CUATRO USD 400 m net synergies (run-rate) OCTAVE with USD 200 m result improvements OCTAVE OCTAVE 2 launched in Q4 2015 CLOSE THE Increase in ship fleet efficiency and container ownership – COST GAP 5 x 10.5k ships ordered and 42% container ownership COMPETE Increase in revenue quality and better utilization of stronger TO WIN market presence – rollout started in January 2016 Successful initial public offering on 6 November 2015 – IPO USD 300 m primary proceeds to increase fleet efficiency 1) CSAV container shipping activities (CCS) 5 Our deliverables Our industry Our position Our track record Financial highlights: …and delivered as promised Our objectives Transport volume Freight rate Revenue 7.4 TEU m 1,225 USD/TEU USD 9,814 m 2014: 5.9 TEU m 2014: 1,427 USD/TEU 2014: USD 9,046 m +25.3% -14.2% +8.5% Transport expenses EBITDA Group profit 1,089 USD/TEU USD 922 m USD 126 m 2014: 1,363 USD/TEU 2014: USD 131 m 2014: USD -802 m -20.1% +602% Earnings turnaround Equity Liquidity reserve Financial debt USD 5.5 bn USD 1.0 bn USD 4.3 bn 2014: USD 5.1 bn 2014: USD 1.1 bn 2014: USD 4.5 bn Enhanced equity Adequate liquidity Reduced debt 6 Our deliverables Our industry Our position Tough market – Q4 results unsustainable Our track record Freight rates expected to recover in 2016 Our objectives CCFI composite index Carriers‘ operating margins Average carrier operating margins 7.6% 1,300 Hapag-Lloyd EBIT margin 1,250 1,200 5% 3.9% 3.8% 1,150 1,100 0.8% 1,050 1,000 0% 950 900 850 -3.6%1) 800 -5% Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 750 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2015 700 650 0.8% 0.6% 600 -2.3% 50 -4.2% -5.1% -5.1% -5.4% 0 -7.7% Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Hapag- CMA Maersk NYK APL K-Line MOL Hanjin 2013 2014 2015 Lloyd CGM 1) Includes financial statements of Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, Maersk, Hanjin, MOL, APL, NYK and K-Line 7 Source: Company information, Alphaliner, SSE Our deliverables Our industry Our position M&A and new alliances create more stability, but Our track record it will take some time before things settle down Our objectives Recent M&A activities Changing landscape in a fragmented market… 2M …including alliance dynamics G6 2,880 CKHYE + 2,677 5,557 Ocean Three 2,362 3,533 3,390 Contribution in kind vs. new shares Non-alliance carriers 3,042 Integration completed in H2 2015 544 1,575 2M G6 CKYHE Ocean 3 Alliance Alliance Alliance Alliance 715 + 966 958 1,818 637 618 575 558 532 509 493 All-cash acquisition (0.96x P/B) 402 397 860 357 349 Closing expected by mid 2016 203 ) ) 1 1 PIL ZIM Line NYK MOL - MSC Lloyd - UASC Hanjin OOCL K Maersk Hyundai Wan Hai Evergreen + Ming Yang Hapag Hamburg Süd Merger of two state conglomerates COSCO / CSCL CMA CGM / APL COSCO charter/operate CSCL fleet 1) Pro-forma combined fleets assuming successful closing 8 Source: MDS Transmodal January 2016, Hapag-Lloyd data, only vessels >399TEU Our deliverables Our industry Our position Our track record Supply demand gap expected to decrease in 2016 Our objectives Supply / demand development Net capacity growth Net capacity growth 18 Demand Supply 16.2% Postponements Scrapping 16 2012 0.8 14 12 2013 0.9 10 9.3% 8.5% 8.3% 8 6.7% 6.1% 5.2% 5.5% 6 4.8% 4.7% 4.9% 2014 1.0 4 4.3% 4.4% 3.5% Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2 1.4% 2.3% 2015 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.6 0 1.0% -2 -4 2016e 1.0 0.2 0.3 1.4 -6 -8 -10.0% 2017e 1.0 0.2 0.3 1.4 -10 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016e 2017e 9 Source: IHS Global Insight, Transmodal, Drewry , Clarksons Our deliverables Our industry Our position Vessel sizes are reaching their economic maximum, Our track record which will help reduce the orderbook going forward Our objectives Declining benefits of ever larger vessels Comments Economies of scale slow down with increasing vessel size 19,000 TEU ships still offer cost advantages compared to the first 15,000 TEU ships because of new vessel designs and operational concepts Approximately half of total savings are attributable to slow steaming Cost The “true economies of scale” of ULC’s are only revealed in a comparison with modern 14,000 TEU units The rapid technologic advance came from the increasing bunker price Vessel size Container ship size close to maximum, as potential cost advantages by Total cost for transport chain Handling costs per TEU further increased sizes might be outpaced by increased handling costs Vessel cost per TEU OECD study: Estimated total cost savings per TEU1) Decreasing cost savings of bigger vessels1)2) 80 $ ,450 Old tech units at $ ,400 22 kn 60 Modern tech units $ ,350 at 22 kn ~15,000 TEU vessel TEU Old tech units at 40 vs. ~8,500 TEU $ ,300 16 kn ~19,000 TEU vessel USD / USD / TEU vs. ~15,000 TEU $ ,250 Modern tech units 20 at 16 kn $ ,200 0 $ ,150 16 knots 18 knots 20 knots 22 knots 24 knots 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 20,000 Vessel size (TEU) 1) Based on bunker price of 350 USD/t aligned from liner assumption of 600 USD/t and on presumed round voyage of 21,000 nautical miles, comparing units of the latest 3 generations at 85% utilization 2) Starting point are 8,500 TEU vessels, build around 2003 10 Source: OECD study on the impact of mega ships, based on Dynamar 2015 Our deliverables Our industry Our position Capacity measures being taken on multiple trades, Our track record as response to supply demand imbalances Our objectives Asia – Europe [weekly capacity] Asia – North America [weekly capacity] 420 TTEU 2014 2015 460 TTEU 2014 2015 -9.0% 400 440 +4.9% 380 420 360 400 -4.5% 340 380 320 360 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Asia – Latin America Idle fleet soars to new record high Share of world fleet 7.8% -18% 1,600 1,570 1,4201,480 11 1,400 Removal of about 14,000 9 TEU weekly or 18% of 1,200 total capacity on this 1,000 838 trade 830 779 800 600 400 356 West Coast South America South Coast West 212 - 200 No. of of No. services Asia (Alphaliner) 0 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 4Q08 4Q09 4Q10 4Q11 4Q12 4Q13 4Q14 4Q15 11 Source: Alphaliner weekly and monthly newsletter Our deliverables Our industry Our position Step-change in results underlines our improved Our track record competitiveness Our objectives Company H1 2015 EBIT [USD m] Company H2 2015 EBIT [USD m] Company FY 2015 EBIT [USD m] Maersk 1,266 10.1% CMA CGM 180 2.4% Maersk 1,431 6.0% CMA CGM 715 9.0% Maersk 165 1.5% CMA CGM 894 5.8% Hapag- Hapag- Hapag- 299 5.7% 108 2.3% 407 4.1% Lloyd Lloyd Lloyd COSCO 262 7.0% OOCL 72 2.5% OOCL 294 5.0% OOCL 222 7.3% NYK -26 (0.9)% Hanjin 119 1.9% Hanjin 206 6.0% K-Line -68 (2.7)% NYK 38 0.6% Wan Hai 119 11.0% Hanjin -86 (3.0)% K-Line -15 (0.3)% ZIM 81 5.2% APL -120 (4.8)% APL -83 (1.5)% Evergreen 70 3.1% MOL -131 (4.1)% MOL -223 (3.4)% NYK 64 2.1% COSCO NA COSCO NA K-Line 54 1.9% CSCL NA CSCL NA APL 37 1.3% Evergreen NA Evergreen NA CSCL 35 1.3% Hyundai NA Hyundai NA Yang Ming 16 0.8% Wan Hai NA Wan Hai NA Hyundai -27 (1.3)% Yang Ming NA Yang Ming NA MOL -92 (2.8)% ZIM NA ZIM NA
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Factbook 2011
    ◇◆◇◆◇◆ ＩＮＤＥＸ ◆◇◆◇◆◇ 1. Management Plan and Improvement of Business Structure 3-5. Emerging Markets (China) ④ Chinese Economic Disparities between Regions P21 1-1. "K"Line Vision 100 General View (as Announced in April 2008) P1 ⑤ Gap of the No. of Durable Goods Owned between Urban and Rural Area 1-2. April 2011, "K"Line Vision 100 ①Review of the Mid-term Management Plan KV100 P2 4. Bulk Carrier Business -New Challenges- ②Target for Financial Index 4-1. "K"Line Fleet ① "K"Line Dry Bulk Fleet P22 ③Trends of Business Performance (P/L) P3 ② "K"Line Energy Transportation Fleet ④Improvement in Financial Position ③ Ship Price as of Placing Order (Dry Bulkers, Tankers) ⑤Changes in Income and Major Financial Indicators ④ Ship Price as of Completion (Dry Bulkers, Tankers) ⑥Fleet Upgrading Plan and Investment P4 4-2. Drybulk Business Expansion into the World P23 ⑦Fleet Size Transition 4-3. Demand on Dry Bulk ① Transition of Crude Steel Production P24 ⑧New Buildings (Results and Plan) ② Global Main Trades of Coal P25 1-3. Trends of Financial Indices ①Net Income and Dividend per Share P5 ③ World Coal Consumption ②Consolidated ROE/ROA ④ Iron Ore Import into Major Asian Countries ③Consolidated Assets Turnover ⑤ Iron Ore Stocks at Chinese Ports ④Consolidated EV/EBITDA ⑥ BDI & Port Congestion in Australia ⑤Operating Cash Flow 5. Car Carrier Business ⑥Consolidated Interest Coverage Ratio 5-1. Fleet and Cargo Movements ① "K"Line PCC Fleet P26 1-4. History of Management Plans P6 ② Cars/Trucks Transported by Our Fleet 1-5. Effort for Structural Reform ①No. of Seafarers/ "K"Line Employee P7 ③ Total Cars/Trucks Exported from Japan ②Our Fleet Scale, Revenures & Ordinary Income 5-2.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Position in the Industry[111KB/2Pages]
    Market Position in the Industry MOL operates a large and balanced oceangoing fl eet. In terms of its total fl eet size and presence in individual market categories, MOL ranks among the world’s largest shipping companies. World Major Carriers’ Fleets (All Vessel Types) (Number of vessels) 0 200 400 600800 1,000 1,200 947 MOL (Japan) 68 NYK (Japan) COSCO (China) K Line (Japan) China Shipping (China) APM-Maersk (Denmark) Oldendorff (Germany) MSC (Switzerland) Swiss Marine (Switzerland) CMA-CGM (France) Fredriksen (Norway) Teekay (Canada) 0 20 40 6080 100 120 (Million deadweight tons (DWT)) ■■ Number of vessels ■■ Million deadweight tons (DWT) Source: MOL internal estimation based on each companies’ published data, Clarkson and Alphaliner (March 2015) World Major Carriers’ Revenue Portfolio by Segment (%) 0 2040608010047 43 10 MOL NYK K Line APM-Maersk COSCO NOL OOIL MISC Frontline Teekay Pacifi c Basin Golar LNG ■ Bulkships ■ Containerships and related business ■ Other businesses Source: MOL calculations based on each company’s fi nancial statements and/or news. MOL’s containerships and related business includes revenue from Containerships, Terminals and Logistics. NYK’s containerships and related business includes revenue from Containerships, Air freighters and Logistics. APM-Maersk’s containerships and related business includes revenue from Terminal business. COSCO’s containerships and related business includes revenue from Terminal business. 38 Mitsui O.S.K. Lines 115mol_英文0723入稿PDF.indd5mol_英文0723入稿PDF.indd 3838 22015/07/23015/07/23 117:337:33
    [Show full text]
  • The Last 23 Years Progression of Asia-Europe Carrier Alliances
    The Last 23 Years Progression of Asia-Europe Carrier Alliances Number of Providers Grand Alliance Global Alliance 1996 Tricon-Hanjin Hapag-Lloyd Nedlloyd HMM DSR-Senator OOCL Maersk MSC CMA COSCO K Line Evergreen NYK 23 Sea-Land Yangming Choyang LLoyd Triestino MISC Norasia Hanjin NOL APL P&O MOL Grand Alliance Global Alliance 1997 CYK Consortium Hapag-Lloyd Nedlloyd Maersk MSC COSCO Evergreen OOCL HMM CMA NYK MISC 20 Sea-Land Norasia K Line LLoyd Triestino NOL Yangming APL P&O MOL Grand Alliance New World 1998 CKY Consortium United Alliance Hapag-Lloyd Alliance COSCO Choyang NYK Maersk MSC Norasia Evergreen APL 21 Sea-Land CMA K Line Hanjin-Senator LLoyd Triestino OOCL MOL Yangming UASC MISC P&O Nedlloyd HMM 1999-2000 Grand Alliance New World Maersk- CKY Consortium United Alliance Evergreen-LT Hapag-Lloyd Alliance Sealand COSCO Choyang NYK MSC Norasia APL 19 Maersk acquired CMA CGM K Line Hanjin-Senator OOCL MOL Sea-Land Yangming UASC MISC P&O Nedlloyd HMM United Alliance Grand Alliance New World 2001 CKY Consortium CSCL Hanjin-Senator Evergreen-LT Hapag-Lloyd Alliance COSCO NYK Maersk- MSC CMA CGM UASC APL 20 Sealand Zim K Line CSAV Norasia OOCL MOL Yangming Choyang Bankrupt MISC P&O Nedlloyd HMM 2002-2004 Grand Alliance CKYH Alliance Evergreen-LT New World CSCL COSCO Hapag-Lloyd Alliance NYK Maersk- MSC CMA CGM UASC K Line APL 20 Sealand OOCL Zim Yangming MISC MOL Hanjin-Senator CSAV Norasia P&O Nedlloyd HMM CKYH Alliance Grand Alliance New World 2005 Maersk- CSCL Evergreen-LT COSCO Hapag-Lloyd Alliance Sealand MSC CMA CGM UASC K Line
    [Show full text]
  • PAUL KENT, PHD Senior Vice President/Global Advisor for Ports and Logistics Nathan Associates Inc
    EASTERN PA FREIGHT SUMMIT Global Logistics Drivers and Implications for Freight Logistics 21-22 June 2018 PAUL KENT, PHD Senior Vice President/Global Advisor for Ports and Logistics Nathan Associates Inc. [email protected]/+1-703-516-7830 Importance of Ports • Important (English) • Importante (Italian, Spanish, Portuguese) • Important (French, Romanian) 2 Strategic Drivers Shaping Logistics Global Economy and Trade Growth • Gap between GDP growth and trade 0.2 growth narrowing 0.15 0.1 • Excess fleet capacity/liner 0.05 concentration 0 • Global urban population growth 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 -0.05 • Disruptive technologies -0.1 TEU Growth GDP Growth 4 Liner Consolidation Year of Formation Q4 2009 Q1 2012 Q2 2015 Q2 2017 NWA G6 Alliance G6 Alliance THE Alliance • New and larger alliances APL/NOL APL/NOL APL/NOL MOL MOL MOL MOL K-Line emerging, largely driven HMM HMM HMM NYK Line Grand Alliance IV Hapaq-Lloyd Hapaq-Lloyd Yang Ming by excess capacity Hapag-Lloyd NYK Line NYK Line Hapag-Lloyd NYK OOCL OOCL Ocean Alliance • Of top 20 carriers, only 2 OOCL CKYH CKYHE CMA CGM have not joined an CKYH Hanjin Hanjin COSCO CS Hanjin K-Line K-Line OOCL alliance, with Maersk K-Line Yang Ming Yang Ming Evergreen Yang Ming COSCO COSCO 2M recently acquiring COSCO MSC/CMA CGM Evergreen MSC MSC 2M Maersk Line Hamburg Sud CMA CGM MSC HMM Maersk Line • Top 5 carriers control 62% Ocean Three CMA CGM of container trades China Shipping • Increased from 44% just 4 UASC years ago Top 20 Carriers Not Part of Alliance Maersk Line Maersk Line PIL, Zim Line PIL, Zim Line MSC Hamburg Sud Hamburg Sud CMA CGM Wan Hai Wan Hai Evergreen Evergreen Source: Notteboom, Theo, PortEconomics, Rounds of alliance formation in container shipping, May 2016, revised by Nathan 5 Associates Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Maritime Transport 2016 Review of Maritime Transport
    UNCTAD UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT For further information on UNCTAD’s work REVIEW on trade logistics, please visit: http://unctad.org/ttl OF MARITIME and for the TRANSPORT Review of Maritime Transport 2016: http://unctad.org/rmt E-mail: 2016 [email protected] To read more and to subscribe to the UNCTAD Transport Newsletter, please visit: http://unctad.org/transportnews 2016 UNITED NATIONS ISBN 978-92-1-112904-5 Layout and printed at United Nations, Geneva 1623510 (E)–November 2016 – 2,102 UNCTAD/RMT/2016 United Nations publication Sales No. E.16.II.D.7 : © Jan Hoffmann Photo credit UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2016 New York and Geneva, 2016 ii REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2016 NOTE The Review of Maritime Transport is a recurrent publication prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat since 1968 with the aim of fostering the transparency of maritime markets and analysing relevant developments. Any factual or editorial corrections that may prove necessary, based on comments made by Governments, will be reflected in a corrigendum to be issued subsequently. * * * Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Use of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. * * * The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Maritime Transport 2014
    UNCTAD UNITED N ATIONS CONFERENC E ON T RADE A ND D EVELOPMENT For further information on UNCTAD’s work REVIEW OF MA on trade logistics, please visit: http://unctad.org/ttl REVIEW and for the Review of Maritime Transport 2014: OF MARITIME http://unctad.org/rmt E-mail: TRANSPORT [email protected] To read more and to subscribe to the UNCTAD Transport Newsletter, please visit: R 2014 http://unctad.org/transportnews ITI M E TR ANSPO R T 2014 UNITED NATIONS ISBN 978-92-1-112878-9 Layout and printed at United Nations, Geneva 1418912 (E)–November 2014–2,062 UNCTADRMT2014 United Nations publication Sales No. E.14.II.D.5 : © Jan Hoffmann Photo credit UNITED N ATIONS CONFERENC E ON T RADE A ND D EVELOPMENT REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2014 New York and Geneva, 2014 ii REVIEW OF MARITIME TRANSPORT 2014 NOTE The Review of Maritime Transport is a recurrent publication prepared by the UNCTAD secretariat since 1968 with the aim of fostering the transparency of maritime markets and analysing relevant developments. Any factual or editorial corrections that may prove necessary, based on comments made by Governments, will be reflected in a corrigendum to be issued subsequently. * * * Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Use of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. * * * The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
    INTERIM CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS * * * Three-month period ended March 31, 2017 The accompanying notes are part of the interim condensed consolidated financial statements. Contents Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Profit & Loss ........................................................................... 3 Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income .......................................................... 4 Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Financial Position - Assets ....................................................... 5 Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Financial Position - Liabilities & Equity .................................... 6 Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of changes in Equity ..................................................................... 7 Interim Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows .............................................................................. 8 Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements ............................................................... 9 Note 1 - Corporate information .................................................................................................................. 9 Note 2 - General accounting principles ....................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Basis of preparation ................................................................................................................. 9 2.2 Change
    [Show full text]
  • The Complex Network Analysis of Liner Shipping Networks: Lessons from the Merger Between COSCO and CSCL Liehui Wang, Nanyi Zhang, Fei Ye, Yui-Yip Lau, César Ducruet
    The complex network analysis of liner shipping networks: Lessons from the merger between COSCO and CSCL Liehui Wang, Nanyi Zhang, Fei Ye, Yui-yip Lau, César Ducruet To cite this version: Liehui Wang, Nanyi Zhang, Fei Ye, Yui-yip Lau, César Ducruet. The complex network analysis of liner shipping networks: Lessons from the merger between COSCO and CSCL. Growth and Change, Wiley, 2020, 10.1111/grow.12428. halshs-02955149 HAL Id: halshs-02955149 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02955149 Submitted on 6 Dec 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The complex network analysis of liner shipping networks: Lessons from the merger between COSCO and CSCL Liehui Wang, Nanyi Zhang, Fei Ye, Yui‐yip Lau, César Ducruet Pre-final version of the article published in Growth and Change, 51(4): 1877-1893. Abstract: COSCO and China Shipping Container Lines (CSCL) are leading enterprises in China’s shipping industry. They merged and reorganized as COSCO Shipping Lines in 2016. Through using a complex network methodology, we analyze the spatial patterns of their shipping networks before and after the merger. We evaluate the integration effects based on two main dimensions: network and hub economies.
    [Show full text]
  • CMA CGM Acquires NOL for $2.4Bn
    Find our latest analyses and trade ideas on bsic.it Submerged shipping companies can do nothing but merge: CMA CGM acquires NOL for $2.4bn Neptune Orient Lines Ltd. market cap as of 29/04/2016: SGD3.346bn (c. USD2.49bn) In the light of the slump in global trade caused by the economic crisis, the once-profitable container-shipping industry has been subject to a wave of consolidation in an attempt to recover from constant losses of the last five years. In order to do so, shipping companies have been forming alliances and merging with each other. The most recent example of this quest for consolidation is represented by the approved $2.4bn acquisition of Neptune Orient Lines (NOL) by CMA CGM. Industry Analysis The container-shipping industry’s revenues are to a great extent bound to the $/TEU rate: they are indeed able to charge a price per carried Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit, being this the main measure for a company’s shipping capacity (1 TEU = 1 20ft-long ISO container). These firms are price takers: the rates they can charge are established according to the China Containerized Freight Index (CCFI) or the Baltic Dry Index (BDI). Container-shipping had been highly profitable thanks to the huge amount of global trade, especially in the form of exports and imports in Asia: in this period the CCFI was trading at multiyear highs above $1000/TEU and carriers were exploiting the situation by increasing their capacity, ordering new and larger vessels. However the global financial crisis and the consequent slump in global trade, together with the commodity prices rout, reduced drastically the volumes of freight exchanged around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Position in the Industry
    MARKET POSITION IN THE INDUSTRY MOL operates a large and balanced oceangoing fleet. In terms of its total fleet size and presence in individual market categories, MOL ranks among the world’s largest shipping companies. WORLD MAJOR CARRIers’ FLEETS (ALL VESSEL TYPES) (Million deadweight tons (DWT)) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 MOL (Japan) 68 958 NYK (Japan) COSCO (China) A.P.Møller-Mærsk (Denmark) K Line (Japan) China Shipping (China) Oldendorff (Germany) Zodiac (U.K.) Teekay Shipping (Canada) Swiss Marine (Switzerland) Frontline (Norway) BW Group (Singapore) 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 (Number of vessels) DWT Number of vessels Source: MOL internal calculation based on each company’s published data and others. As of March 2013 WORLD MAJOR CARRIers’ REVENUE PORTFOLIO BY SEGMENTS (%) 0 20 40 60 80 100 MOL 48 40 11 NYK K Line A.P.Møller-Mærsk Evergreen NOL OOIL MISC Frontline Teekay Pacific Basin Golar LNG Bulkships Containerships and related business Other businesses Source: MOL calculations based on each company’s financial statements and/or website. MOL’s containerships and related business includes revenue from Containerships, Terminal and Logistics. NYK’s containerships and related business includes revenue from Containerships, Air freighters and Logistics. 24 DRY BULKERS (Thousand deadweight tons) 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 NYK MOL 34,928 K Line Source: Companies’ published data and Clarkson Research COSCO Services Limited 2013 China As of March 2013 Shipping TANKERS (Thousand deadweight tons) 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 MOL 15,458 Fredriksen SCF NYK MISC Teekay NIOC Source: Clarkson A.P.Møller-Mærsk Research Services Dynacom Tankers Limited 2013 Angelicoussis As of March 2013 LNG CARRIERS (Number of vessels) 0 20 40 60 80 MOL 69 NYK Nakilat* K Line *Qatar Gas Transport Company Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • CMA CGM: Your Shipping Expert in XXL Cargo
    Group Corporate Presentation Led by its founder, Mr Jacques R. Saadé, CMA CGM is a leading worldwide shipping group. CMA CGM Group is today a global carrier operating on all the world’s shipping routes and offers the full range of logistics and transportation services to its customers. Founded in 1978 by Jacques R. Saadé, today CMA CGM is the world’s third largest container shipping group and number one in France. CMA CGM is headquartered in Marseille (France), and operates out of over 600 offices and agencies in more than 160 countries. With regular services on over 200 shipping lines, the Group manages a dense network capable of meeting the expectations of its customers all over the world. The CMA CGM Group’s primary objective is to meet the growing needs of its customers from a sustainable development perspective. CMA CGM provides customers with tailor-made solutions to meet all their transport requirements, on land as well as at sea. Our main recent achievements JUNE 2016 APRIL 2016 APRIL 2016 MARCH 2016 MARCH 2016 DECEMBER 2015 CMA CGM signs a CMA CGM Takes CMA CGM, COSCO Launch of the new Financial results 2015: CMA CGM TO ACQUIRE Carbon Pact with DB control of NOL Group Container Lines, Evergreen REEFER advertising CMA CGM has known a NOL Group: If the Schenker, the German and APL Brand on Line and Orient Overseas campaign. The ad strong increase of the acquisition is validated by logistics provider. The June 10th 2016. Container Line to establish highlights the expertise volumes (+6,3%) and a competent authorities, CMA agreement aims to Temasek and its “OCEAN Alliance”.
    [Show full text]
  • Merger Review in the Container Liner Shipping Sector
    Merger Review in the Container Liner Shipping Sector 16th EU-China Competition Week Beijing, 12 March 2018 Prof. Dr. Stephan Simon1 Senior Expert Mergers/ Case Manager Transport Directorate 1 The views expressed are those of the author and cannot be regarded as stating DG Competition an official position of the European Commission These slides are part of a presentation and cannot be fully understood separately from that presentation. Ideas presented here are intended to promote further discussion and analysis. They may not represent a complete or well-articulated picture of the author‘s view. Outline Market Structure & Consolidation Market definition Market share calculation Assessment – the free market Recent cases: With remedies Unconditional clearance Verticals – Terminals Question time 2 Market Structure • Global industry increasingly concentrated • After latest merger wave top 5 carriers account for around 65% of global tonnage • Five leading carriers with global scale • Ten small global carriers with market shares of 2- 5% trying to catch up with five industry leaders • Carriers with scale in a certain region • BUT: Commission looks at legs of trade • Product is a commodity • Standardised container 3 Market Structure 4 Market trends • Structural Overcapacity • Despite massive scrapping, increase in capacity: +5.6% in 2018 according to Alphaliner. Due mainly to continued delivery of mega ships > 13.000 TEU • Capacity growth > demand growth over past decade • Declining freight rates • Industry incurs losses • Bankruptcy of then world's number 7, Hanjin, in autumn 2016 • However, signs of recovery since May 2017 • Consolidation • Since 2014: new merger wave, and reduction of global alliances from 4 to 3.
    [Show full text]