(b) Community industry (21 co-operating Community
produces)
Production and capacity utilisation of the Community
industy
Table 5 |
- Production, capacity and capacity utilisation (INDEX 1997=100) |
|
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
Capacity CGT |
100 |
100 |
101 |
101 |
101 |
Production CGT |
100 |
99 |
90 |
88 |
93 |
Capacity utilisation % |
100 |
100 |
90 |
88 |
92 |
|
Source: Questionnailre replies |
It has to be borne in mind that production relates
to work in progress whereas sales are established on the basis of contract dates.
While capacity remained almost unchanged production
volume slightly increased by 5% between 2000 and 2001. Over the whole period (1997
to 2001). the production volume decreased by around 6.5% and consequently, capacity
utilisation declined to the same extent.
Sales volumes of the Community industry
As mentioned above, for the purpose of the injury analysis,
sales are based on new orders, in this case contracted by 21 co-operating Community
producers. The sales volume of each vessel is therefore attributed to the period
in which the contract date falls. It should be noted that a vast majority of the
contracts secured during the new investigation period were signed during the month
of December 2000, as a consequence of the removal of the state aids on 1stJanuary 2001.
Table 6 |
- Sales volumes in CGT in terms of new orders (INDEX 1997-100) |
CGT |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
Jan-Nov
2000 |
IP (Dec
2000+2001) |
Bulk carriers |
100 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Product and chemical tankers |
100 |
49 |
0 |
110 |
135 |
Container ships |
100 |
74 |
43 |
116 |
99 |
Oil tankers |
100 |
33 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Passenger & RORO ferries |
100 |
558 |
520 |
294 |
662 |
LNG |
− |
− |
− |
100 |
67 |
Other types |
100 |
124 |
53 |
126 |
109 |
Total |
100 |
98 |
64 |
121 |
129 |
|
Source: Questionnaire replies |
The overall sales volume increased by around 7% between
the period from January to November 2000 and the current investigation period.
Compared to the previous year, the absolute level of new orders during the current
investigation period appears relatively high. The overall trend mainly results
from a significantly increasing volume of new orders in the passenger and RoRo
ferries sector. This trend is however not in line with the statistics concerning
the overall Community producers as reported above. The level of new orders decreased
in the container ship and LNG sectors, respectively by 15% and 33%, while it incrensed
for passenger/RoRo ferries and for product and chemical tankers.
Sales prices of the Community industry
Table 7 - Sales prices (INDEX 1997-100) |
(e/CGT) |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
Jan-Nov
2000 |
IP (Dec
2000+2001) |
Bulk carriers |
100 |
− |
− |
− |
− |
Product and chemical tankers |
100 |
100 |
− |
49 |
79 |
Container ships |
100 |
109 |
88 |
95 |
109 |
Oil tankers |
100 |
78 |
− |
− |
− |
Passenger & RoRo ferries |
100 |
104 |
105 |
115 |
89 |
LNG |
− |
− |
− |
100 |
108 |
Other types |
100 |
67 |
85 |
105 |
102 |
Average |
100 |
105 |
103 |
102 |
104 |
|
Source: Questionnaire replies |
The overall average sales prices remained rather stable
during the current investigation period compared to the period January to November
2000. Per sector, prices observed in the product and chemical tankers are significantly
higher than in the period January to November 2000. They are however still lower
than the 1997 and 1998 price levels. In the container ship sector, the average
prices increased by around 13% during the current investigation period. In the
passenger and RORO sector, where the Community industry more than doubled its
sales volume, prices significantly decreased in the period January to November
2000 to the current investigation period, to a level which the lower reached for
this sector in the last five years. As to the LNGs, their average sales prices
increased by 8% in the current investigation period. compared to the period January
to November 2000.
In addition, the Community industry still could not
sell certain ship types at all during the current investigation period (oil tankers
and product and chemical tankers) and therefore no data were available to establish
the relevant price trends.
Profitability of the Community industry
As in the first report, profitability was compiled
in two separate tables taking into account the income (sales values), both excluding
and including operating subsidies. These profitability figures relate to the contracts
concluded in the respective periods. Therefore, for vessels still in the order
book and not yet delivered, the latest estimation of the profitability was included.
Profitability has been expressed as profit/loss in percentage of the sales value
(excluding or including operating subsidies). For confidentiality reasons, only
the trend of overall profitability is shown here.
Table 8a-Profitability trend excluding subsidies |
The overall profitability (excluding subsidies) remained negative throughout the whole period under consideration, even if there is an improving trend in the last periods. The container ship and product and chemical tankers are, together with the other ship types, the sectors that suffered the highest losses during the current investigation period. For the reasons explained above no precise profitability figure could be established for the LNG sector.
Table 8b-Profitability trend including subsidies |
Employment of the Community industry
Table 9 - Employment(INDEX 1997=100) |
|
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
Number of employees |
100 |
96 |
93 |
93 |
90 |
|
Source: Questionnaire replies |
Direct employment in the Community industry decreased by 3% between 2000 and 2001 and by 10% during the whole period 1997 to 2001.
Investment of the Community industry
Table 10- Employment(INDEX 1997=100) |
|
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
Number of employees |
100 |
87 |
57 |
76 |
92 |
|
Source: Questionnaire replies |
Investments related to commercial vessels increased by 21% between 2000 and 2001. These investments were not related to an increase in capacity but rather to the modernisation of technical equipment. Over the whole period, the decrease was of around 8%.
Price Undercutting
In order to calculate price undercutting, the Commission services used the same methodology applied in their first investigation. Data on Korean sales prices per vessel during the current investigation period as reported in the Commission's monthly market monitoring reports6 were compared to sales prices of comparable vessels, in terms of ship type and volume, sold by Community industry during the same period (e,g.: the Korean price for a 60 000 CGT containership was compared to the price for a 60 000 CGT containership sold by the Community industry during the same period). The price difference was then establisbed as a percentage of the Korean price.
On the basis of such a comparison of sales prices for 9 product and chemical tankers, 13 containerships and 12 LNGs sold by the Korean shipyards, with sales prices for vessels comparable in type and size sold by the Community industry, an undercutting margin was found ranging between 7 and 35%.
These undercutting margins found are in line with those established during the first investigation.
6 These reports are made by an indepedent consultant upon request of DG Enterprise for the purpose of the mafket monitoring group, and are not publicly available informatian.
|