Asia's Port Operators Come Under Pressure
Asia's largest seaports face a price war, as new transshipment centers in China and Malaysia force down margins even as the region's export growth fuels a surge in shipping volumes.
The recovering global economy and this year's flood of exports from China have caused freight rates to rise sharply. But this comes at a time several Asian countries have been expanding ports where shippers can consolidate regional cargo for long-haul voyages, believing such projects offer good profits on the back of the region's booming trade. The resulting glut of transshipment infrastructure has kept port operators from cashing in, industry observers say.
"If there's any surplus capacity at ports, it puts the shipping lines in a very strong position," says David Bayne, an Australia-based port economist.
On Tuesday, the South Korean government, citing competition from the Port of Shanghai, said it will offer high-volume shipping companies a 50% reduction in port fees at Busan, in the southeast, and Gwangyang, on the south coast.
Busan, South Korea's dominant port, is expected this year to lose its status as the world's third-busiest container hub to Shanghai, where volumes have grown 33% so far this year, compared with 9% at Busan. Strikes by truck drivers during the summer, followed by a September typhoon that severely damaged a number of terminals, created problems for Busan this year. In 2002, Busan moved 9.45 million twenty-foot equivalent units -- a standard industry unit measure -- compared with 8.61 million TEUs by Shanghai. In February, the Chinese port opened its huge Shanghai East Container Terminal, further increasing capacity.
Singapore Cuts Fees
The new capacity is worrying for port operators, who face the prospect of either losing business to less-expensive ports or slashing their prices. "What's playing out now was predictable," says John Meredith, group managing director for Hutchison Port Holdings, which has terminal operations in Hong Kong, Shanghai, South Korea, Malaysia and elsewhere in Asia. "Governments think the way to solve [their own] slide in volumes is to build more and more terminals, but that only makes the situation worse."
Overcapacity has driven down handling charges in Singapore and threatens to do the same in Hong Kong. Last year, Singapore port operator PSA Corp. was forced to slash some handling fees by half to keep more container lines from defecting to a fast-growing Malaysian rival, the Port of Tanjung Pelepas. Maersk Sealand, the world's largest container line, moved its Southeast Asian transshipment hub from Singapore to Tanjung Pelepas in 2000, followed two years later by Taiwan's Evergreen Marine Corp.
In transshipment work, large container lines pay for the dockage and infrastructure needed to shift cargo from one vessel to another, often consolidating or unpacking it for long-haul transport to the U.S. or Europe. Cost-wise, transshipment is the most volatile part of the shipping business. There is always the chance that "you wake up one day to see that the customer has gone elsewhere," says Hutchison's Mr. Meredith.
'Forward Risk'
About 40% of Busan's business is transshipment. By contrast, Hong Kong handles a large volume of local cargo because it is an entrep?t for southern China. That helps protect Hong Kong's business from being poached. Even so, new ports in the Pearl River Delta, are a "forward risk" for Hong Kong, Mr. Meredith says. "There's going to be an overcapacity in this region," he says, adding that it "will be particularly acute if there's any cooling off in export trade with the U.S."
The competition for transshipment business even extends to ports in the same country. In South Korea, the rivalry between Busan and Gwangyang is intense, industry observers say. In China, "you have lots of competing regional authorities building ports," says Mr. Bayne, the port economist. "There's no central authority."
China's burgeoning trade could translate into more stable volumes for the region's transshipment ports in general, some observers say. "In the 1980s, transshipment was just 11% of the business, now it's 25%. I think there's enough to go around," says Jung Boon Min, a senior research fellow at the Korea Maritime Institute in Seoul.
That optimism is tempered by expansion at the Port of Tanjung Pelepas, new ports on the Pearl River and a 20-year project for 13 kilometers of new waterfront and 52 new berths in Shanghai.
亚洲港口运营商面临压力
尽管亚洲地区的出口增长推动了航运量的增加，但是由于中国和马来西亚的新转运中心导致行业利润率下降，亚洲最大的一些海港仍面临一场价格战。
行业观察员认为，全球经济的复苏和今年中国大量的出口导致货运费大幅提高。但与此同时，一些亚洲国家在增加港口，并相信在地区贸易繁荣的情况下，港口项目能够带来良好的利润。行业观察人士称，转运基础设施过剩使得港口运营商无法盈利。
一名澳大利亚港口经济学家表示，如果港口的处理能力过剩，就会使得航运公司处于非常有利的地位。
韩国政府周二表示，由于来自上海港口的竞争，其将把东南部釜山和南部光阳港口对航运公司收取的费用下调一半。
预计韩国重要港口釜山港今年将把全球第三繁忙的集装箱中心的地位拱手让给上海。上海今年迄今为止的运输量已经增长了33%，高于釜山港的9%。由于今年夏季受到卡车司机罢工的冲击，9月份的台风又严重地破获了一些码头，釜山港今年困难重重。在2002年，釜山港处理的标准箱为945万个，高于同期上海的861万个。中国今年2月份开放了大型的上海东部集装箱码头，进一步提高了处理能力。
新加坡削减处理费用
新增处理能力是港口运营商的心头之患。这些运营商面临这要么让更低成本的港口夺走业务，要么削减价格的处境。和记黄埔港口(Hutchison Port Holdings)的集团经理John Meredith表示，当前的结果还很难预料。该集团在香港、上海、韩国、马来西亚和亚洲其他地方都有码头业务。他称，政府认为解决运输量下降的途径就是修建更多的码头，但这只会令情况更加糟糕。
港口处理能力过剩已经促使新加坡下调了处理费用，并迫使香港面临同样的境地。新加坡港口运营商PSA Corp去年被迫把处理费用削减了一半，以阻止更多的集装箱运输公司被快速成长的竞争对手马来西亚的丹戎帕拉帕斯港(Tanjung Pelepas)夺走。全球最大的集装箱运输公司马士基海陆航运(Maersk Sealand)在2000年把东南亚的转运中心从新加坡迁移到了戎帕拉帕斯港，两年后，台湾长荣海运股份有限公司(Evergreen Marine Corp.)也采取了同样举措。
在转运业务中，大型集装箱运输公司支付所需的船坞使用费和基础设施费用，把货物从一艘船转移到另一只，对发往美国或者欧洲港口的长途货物进行整合或者拆分。转运业务是运输业务中变化最快的部分。和记黄埔港口的Meredith表示，很有可能有一天当你醒来时，发现客户已经不知去向。
潜在的风险
釜山港处理的业务中大约40%是转运业务。与此形成对比的是，由于香港是中国南部的入口，香港处理的多是当地货物。这种业务结构可以保证香港的业务不被夺走。Meredith表示，即使这样，在珠江三角洲的新增港口仍是香港面临的潜在风险。他称在这个地区将出现大量的处理能力过剩的情况，并补充称如果同美国的出口贸易降温，这种过剩情况可能会更加严重。
对转运业务的竞争甚至在同一国家的不同港口之间进行。行业观察员表示，韩国釜山港和光阳港之间的竞争十分激烈。港口经济学家Bayne表示，中国有很多地区政府修建各自的港口，形成了相互之间的竞争。
一些观察员认为，中国日渐增长的贸易量可能转化为该地区转运港口更加稳定的处理量。位于汉城的Korea Maritime Institute的高级研究员Jung Boon表示，在20世纪80年代，转运业务仅占业务量的11%，现在已经占到了25%。该业务有足够的发展空间。
但是这种乐观预期也因为丹戎帕拉帕斯港的扩展、珠江新增港口和上海为期20年的13公里新码头和52个泊位项目而大打折扣。
