New Articles

Global Concentrated Orange Juice Market – Brazil Strengthened Its Position as the World’s Leading Exporter

orange juice

Global Concentrated Orange Juice Market – Brazil Strengthened Its Position as the World’s Leading Exporter

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Concentrated Orange Juice – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The global concentrated orange juice market revenue amounted to $4B in 2018, growing by 6.1% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). The market value increased at an average annual rate of +1.5% from 2008 to 2018; the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The global concentrated orange juice market peaked in 2018 and is likely to continue its growth in the near future.

Consumption By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of concentrated orange juice consumption in 2018 were Brazil (674K tonnes), the U.S. (656K tonnes) and France (141K tonnes), with a combined 62% share of global consumption. The UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Japan, Spain and Ireland lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 18%.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of concentrated orange juice consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Japan, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the U.S. ($1.4B), Brazil ($1.1B) and France ($218M) were the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2018, together accounting for 69% of the global market. These countries were followed by the Netherlands, Belgium, Japan, the UK, Ireland and Spain, which together accounted for a further 16%.

The countries with the highest levels of concentrated orange juice per capita consumption in 2018 were Belgium (8,445 kg per 1000 persons), Ireland (7,486 kg per 1000 persons) and the Netherlands (5,039 kg per 1000 persons).

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of concentrated orange juice per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Japan, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Market Forecast 2019-2025

Driven by rising demand for concentrated orange juice worldwide, the market is expected to start an upward consumption trend over the next seven years. The performance of the market is forecast to increase slightly, with an anticipated CAGR of +0.6% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to bring the market volume to 2.5M tonnes by the end of 2025.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, the amount of concentrated orange juice produced worldwide totaled 2.2M tonnes, rising by 6% against the previous year. The total output volume increased at an average annual rate of +1.8% over the period from 2008 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being observed throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2009 with an increase of 8.3% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice production reached its peak figure volume in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, concentrated orange juice production amounted to $3.4B in 2018 estimated in export prices. In general, the total output indicated a perceptible expansion from 2008 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +1.8% over the last decade. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, concentrated orange juice production increased by +19.1% against 2016 indices. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2012 when production volume increased by 53% against the previous year. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice production reached its maximum level at $3.5B in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Production By Country

Brazil (1.1M tonnes) constituted the country with the largest volume of concentrated orange juice production, accounting for 49% of total production. Moreover, concentrated orange juice production in Brazil exceeded the figures recorded by the world’s second-largest producer, the U.S. (413K tonnes), threefold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Mexico (137K tonnes), with a 6.4% share.

In Brazil, concentrated orange juice production expanded at an average annual rate of +3.1% over the period from 2008-2018. The remaining producing countries recorded the following average annual rates of production growth: the U.S. (+0.7% per year) and Mexico (+16.9% per year).

Exports 2007-2018

Global exports totaled 1.3M tonnes in 2018, growing by 16% against the previous year. In general, concentrated orange juice exports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2018 when exports increased by 16% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice exports attained their peak figure at 1.6M tonnes in 2009; however, from 2010 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, concentrated orange juice exports amounted to $2B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, concentrated orange juice exports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2010 when exports increased by 11% y-o-y. The global exports peaked at $2.3B in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

Exports by Country

Brazil was the largest exporting country with an export of about 381K tonnes, which amounted to 30% of total exports. Belgium (146K tonnes) occupied a 12% share (based on tonnes) of total exports, which put it in second place, followed by the Netherlands (12%), Mexico (11%), Costa Rica (9.4%) and Germany (5.2%). The following exporters – Spain (31K tonnes), South Africa (25K tonnes), the UK (22K tonnes), Thailand (20K tonnes) and the U.S. (20K tonnes) – each finished at a 9.4% share of total exports.

From 2008 to 2018, average annual rates of growth with regard to concentrated orange juice exports from Brazil stood at +1.1%. At the same time, Mexico (+29.4%), Costa Rica (+16.4%), South Africa (+9.4%), the UK (+7.3%) and Thailand (+1.6%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Mexico emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +29.4% from 2008-2018. By contrast, the Netherlands (-1.4%), Germany (-4.0%), the U.S. (-4.0%), Spain (-6.6%) and Belgium (-9.5%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2008 to 2018, the share of Mexico, Costa Rica and Brazil increased by +9.9%, +7.4% and +3% percentage points, while the Netherlands (-1.7 p.p.), Spain (-2.5 p.p.), Germany (-2.6 p.p.) and Belgium (-19.9 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the largest concentrated orange juice markets worldwide were Brazil ($706M), Belgium ($418M) and the Netherlands ($358M), together accounting for 74% of global exports. Germany, Costa Rica, Mexico, the U.S., Spain, South Africa, the UK and Thailand lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 18%.

Mexico recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, among the main exporting countries over the last decade, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The average concentrated orange juice export price stood at $1,593 per tonne in 2018, declining by -6.4% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the concentrated orange juice export price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2011 an increase of 28% year-to-year. In that year, the average export prices for concentrated orange juice attained their peak level of $1,744 per tonne. From 2012 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average export prices for concentrated orange juice remained at a lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major exporting countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Belgium ($2,855 per tonne), while Mexico ($418 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Belgium, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 1.5M tonnes of concentrated orange juice were imported worldwide; jumping by 17% against the previous year. Over the period under review, concentrated orange juice imports, however, continue to indicate a measured deduction. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2018 when imports increased by 17% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global concentrated orange juice imports attained their maximum at 2M tonnes in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, concentrated orange juice imports stood at $2.3B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, concentrated orange juice imports, however, continue to indicate a measured drop. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 23% against the previous year. The global imports peaked at $2.8B in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

Imports by Country

The countries with the highest levels of concentrated orange juice imports in 2018 were the U.S. (263K tonnes), the Netherlands (231K tonnes), Belgium (190K tonnes), France (142K tonnes), the UK (122K tonnes) and Germany (101K tonnes), together amounting to 71% of total import. The following importers – Japan (51K tonnes), Spain (44K tonnes), Ireland (41K tonnes) and Poland (35K tonnes) – together made up 11% of total imports.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by Japan, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the Netherlands ($471M), Belgium ($347M) and Germany ($227M) constituted the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, with a combined 46% share of global imports. These countries were followed by the UK, France, the U.S., Japan, Spain, Poland and Ireland, which together accounted for a further 37%.

Among the main importing countries, Japan experienced the highest growth rate of imports, over the last decade, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average concentrated orange juice import price amounted to $1,523 per tonne, coming down by -6.1% against the previous year. In general, the concentrated orange juice import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when the average import price increased by 28% against the previous year. In that year, the average import prices for concentrated orange juice attained their peak level of $1,625 per tonne. From 2012 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average import prices for concentrated orange juice failed to regain its momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Spain ($2,496 per tonne), while the U.S. ($450 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Spain, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

colouring

Germany’s Market for Vegetable or Animal Colouring Matter Rose 13% to Reach $91M in 2018

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Germany – Colouring Matter Of Vegetable Or Animal Origin – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the market for colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin in Germany amounted to $91M in 2018, going up by 13% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). The market value increased at an average annual rate of +2.8% from 2008 to 2018; however, the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with only minor fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2012 with an increase of 19% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the market for vegetable or animal colouring matter reached its peak figure level in 2018 and is likely to see steady growth in the near future.

Production in Germany

In 2018, the production of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin in Germany stood at 9.7K tonnes, increasing by 37% against the previous year. Over the period under review, production of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin continues to indicate a resilient increase. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2012 when production volume increased by 48% year-to-year. Production of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin peaked in 2018 and is expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, production of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin amounted to $65M in 2018 estimated in export prices. In general, production of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2014 when production volume increased by 12% year-to-year. In that year, production of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin reached its peak level of $74M. From 2015 to 2018, production of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin growth remained at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports from Germany

In 2018, approx. 4.3K tonnes of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin were exported from Germany; picking up by 2.3% against the previous year. The total export volume increased at an average annual rate of +3.2% over the period from 2008 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations over the period under review. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2010 when exports increased by 18% against the previous year. Exports peaked in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, exports of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin totaled $91M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total export value increased at an average annual rate of +3.1% from 2008 to 2018; the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when exports increased by 43% year-to-year. Exports peaked at $109M in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, exports failed to regain their momentum.

Exports by Country

Ukraine (414 tonnes), the Netherlands (371 tonnes) and France (318 tonnes) were the main destinations of exports of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin from Germany, with a combined 26% share of total exports.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main countries of destination, was attained by Ukraine, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest markets for vegetable or animal colouring matter exported from Germany were the Netherlands ($8.6M), the UK ($8.4M) and France ($6.4M), with a combined 26% share of total exports. Hungary, Italy, Spain, Poland, Belgium, Israel, Turkey, Ukraine and Austria lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 39%.

Hungary experienced the highest growth rate of exports, among the main countries of destination over the last decade, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average export price for colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin amounted to $21,162 per tonne, growing by 7.1% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the export price for colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2011 an increase of 30% y-o-y. In that year, the average export prices for colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin attained their peak level of $30,856 per tonne. From 2012 to 2018, the growth in terms of the average export prices for colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin failed to regain its momentum.

There were significant differences in the average prices for the major foreign markets. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Hungary ($32,531 per tonne), while the average price for exports to Ukraine ($7,105 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to Hungary, while the prices for the other major destinations experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports into Germany

Imports of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin into Germany totaled 5.5K tonnes in 2018, jumping by 7% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +4.0% from 2008 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 17% against the previous year. Imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the near future.

In value terms, imports of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin stood at $107M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, the total imports indicated resilient growth from 2008 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +4.0% over the last decade. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, imports of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin increased by +18.5% against 2015 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 25% year-to-year. Imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the near future.

Imports by Country

The Netherlands (1.3K tonnes), China (678 tonnes) and Italy (548 tonnes) were the main suppliers of imports of colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin to Germany, together comprising 46% of total imports. These countries were followed by the U.S., India, Peru, Ecuador, Denmark, Spain, Belgium, the UK and France, which together accounted for a further 44%.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main suppliers, was attained by Ecuador, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest vegetable or animal colouring matter suppliers to Germany were China ($20M), the Netherlands ($19M) and Peru ($8.5M), together accounting for 44% of total imports.

In terms of the main suppliers, China experienced the highest growth rate of imports, over the last decade, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the average import price for colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin amounted to $19,424 per tonne, reducing by -5.2% against the previous year. Over the period from 2008 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +2.5%. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2011 when the average import price increased by 35% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the average import prices for colouring matter of vegetable or animal origin reached their peak figure at $25,499 per tonne in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, import prices remained at a lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was France ($30,870 per tonne), while the price for Ecuador ($4,082 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Peru, while the prices for the other major suppliers experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

Footwear Treatments Market in the EU Recovers Robustly

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘EU – Polishes And Creams For Footwear Or Leather – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the footwear treatments market in the European Union amounted to $126M in 2018, picking up by 4.9% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). Over the last two years, it grew tangibly, recovering from a consistent deduction observed from 2014-2016. The level of footwear treatments consumption peaked at $193M in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, consumption yet failed to regain its momentum.

Consumption By Country in the EU

The countries with the highest volumes of footwear treatments consumption in 2018 were Italy (5K tonnes), Spain (3.6K tonnes) and Germany (3.2K tonnes), together comprising 45% of total consumption. France, Poland, the UK, the Netherlands, Romania, Belgium, Austria, Bulgaria and Hungary lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 42%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of footwear treatments consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by France, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

The countries with the highest levels of footwear treatments per capita consumption in 2018 were Italy (84 kg per 1000 persons), Bulgaria (82 kg per 1000 persons) and Spain (78 kg per 1000 persons).

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of footwear treatments per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by France, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Production in the EU

In 2018, the production of polishes and creams for footwear or leather in the European Union totaled 32K tonnes, increasing by 4.4% against the previous year. In general, footwear treatments production, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. In value terms, footwear treatments production totaled $129M in 2018 estimated in export prices.

Production By Country in the EU

The countries with the highest volumes of footwear treatments production in 2018 were Italy (6.7K tonnes), Spain (5.7K tonnes) and Germany (4.3K tonnes), with a combined 53% share of total production. These countries were followed by Poland, France, Austria and the Netherlands, which together accounted for a further 32%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of footwear treatments production, amongst the main producing countries, was attained by Austria, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Exports in the EU

In 2018, approx. 27K tonnes of polishes and creams for footwear or leather were exported in the European Union; approximately reflecting the previous year. In general, footwear treatments exports continue to indicate a mild descent. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2010 when exports increased by 13% against the previous year. Over the period under review, footwear treatments exports reached their peak figure at 30K tonnes in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure. In value terms, footwear treatments exports amounted to $204M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Exports by Country

In 2018, Germany (6.1K tonnes), distantly followed by Poland (3,497 tonnes), Spain (2,947 tonnes), Italy (2,583 tonnes), the Netherlands (2,562 tonnes), the UK (1,924 tonnes), France (1,639 tonnes) and Austria (1,460 tonnes) were the largest exporters of polishes and creams for footwear or leather, together mixing up 85% of total exports.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main exporting countries, was attained by the Netherlands, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports in the EU

The imports amounted to 21K tonnes in 2018, approximately reflecting the previous year. In general, footwear treatments imports, however, continue to indicate a measured curtailment. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2010 when imports increased by 12% y-o-y. Over the period under review, footwear treatments imports attained their maximum at 26K tonnes in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, imports failed to regain their momentum. In value terms, footwear treatments imports totaled $137M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Imports by Country

In 2018, Germany (5K tonnes), distantly followed by Poland (2,206 tonnes), the UK (2,131 tonnes), the Netherlands (2,092 tonnes) and France (1,779 tonnes) represented the major importers of polishes and creams for footwear or leather, together achieving 62% of total imports. Belgium (934 tonnes), Italy (892 tonnes), Spain (843 tonnes), Romania (696 tonnes), Denmark (652 tonnes), Portugal (542 tonnes) and Sweden (459 tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

From 2007 to 2018, average annual rates of growth with regard to footwear treatments imports into Germany stood at +1.7%. At the same time, the Netherlands (+6.2%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, the Netherlands emerged as the fastest-growing importer in the European Union, with a CAGR of +6.2% from 2007-2018. Denmark, Portugal, Belgium and Italy experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, Sweden (-1.5%), France (-2.5%), the UK (-2.7%), Spain (-3.0%), Poland (-3.3%) and Romania (-6.3%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2007 to 2018, the share of the Netherlands and Germany increased by +4.8% and +3.9% percentage points, while Spain (-1.6 p.p.), France (-2.7 p.p.), Romania (-3.5 p.p.), the UK (-3.5 p.p.) and Poland (-4.7 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

herring

The Growth of Canned Herring Market in the EU Loses Momentum

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘EU – Herrings (Prepared Or Preserved) – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the herring market in the European Union amounted to $1.5B in 2018, remaining relatively stable against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). From 2016-2017, the market grew rapidly, recovering from a noticeable slump observed in 2015. In 2018, however, the market growth lost its momentum, and the market volume stays within its relatively flat long-term trend pattern.

Consumption By Country in the EU

The countries with the highest volumes of canned herring consumption in 2018 were Germany (81K tonnes), Poland (80K tonnes) and the UK (68K tonnes), with a combined 55% share of total consumption. These countries were followed by Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and Hungary, which together accounted for a further 31%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of herring consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by the Netherlands, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest herring markets in the European Union were Germany ($420M), Poland ($222M) and the UK ($212M), together accounting for 58% of the total market.

The countries with the highest levels of herring per capita consumption in 2018 were Poland (2,1 kg per person), Italy (1,1 kg per person) and Hungary (1,0 kg per person).

Production in the EU

In 2018, approx. 423K tonnes of herrings (prepared or preserved) were produced in the European Union; approximately equating the previous year. In general, herring production, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 when production volume increased by 2.9% against the previous year. In value terms, herring production totaled $1.9B in 2018 estimated in export prices.

Production By Country in the EU

The countries with the highest volumes of herring production in 2018 were Poland (109K tonnes), Italy (66K tonnes) and the UK (65K tonnes), with a combined 57% share of total production. These countries were followed by Germany, Spain, Denmark and Lithuania, which together accounted for a further 32%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of herring production, amongst the main producing countries, was attained by Lithuania, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Exports in the EU

In 2018, the exports of herrings (prepared or preserved) in the European Union totaled 121K tonnes, increasing by 6.9% against the previous year. Over the period under review, herring exports, however, continue to indicate a mild reduction. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 with an increase of 13% year-to-year. In value terms, herring exports stood at $399M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Exports by Country

Poland was the main exporter of herrings (prepared or preserved) in the European Union, with the volume of exports accounting for 52K tonnes, which was approx. 43% of total exports in 2018. Denmark (27K tonnes) ranks second in terms of the total exports with a 22% share, followed by Germany (20%) and Lithuania (5.2%). The following exporters – Sweden (4,143 tonnes) and the Netherlands (3,077 tonnes) – each accounted for a 6% share of total exports.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main exporting countries, was attained by Germany, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Poland ($165M) remains the largest herring supplier in the European Union, comprising 41% of total herring exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Denmark ($82M), with a 21% share of total exports. It was followed by Germany, with a 19% share.

Export Prices by Country

The herring export price in the European Union stood at $3,295 per tonne in 2018, reducing by -1.5% against the previous year. Over the period from 2007 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +1.5%.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was the Netherlands ($6,046 per tonne), while Denmark ($3,072 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by the Netherlands, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports in the EU

The imports stood at 115K tonnes in 2018, increasing by 3.9% against the previous year. Overall, herring imports, however, continue to indicate a slight contraction. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2008 with an increase of 4.1% against the previous year. In that year, herring imports reached their peak of 137K tonnes. From 2009 to 2018, the growth of herring imports remained at a somewhat lower figure. In value terms, herring imports totaled $327M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Imports by Country

Germany was the key importer of herrings (prepared or preserved) in the European Union, with the volume of imports finishing at 45K tonnes, which was approx. 39% of total imports in 2018. Poland (23K tonnes) occupied the second position in the ranking, distantly followed by the Netherlands (7,378 tonnes), Sweden (5,846 tonnes) and Denmark (5,698 tonnes). All these countries together occupied approx. 36% share of total imports. The UK (3,262 tonnes), Finland (3,251 tonnes), Austria (3,246 tonnes), Romania (2,774 tonnes), the Czech Republic (2,359 tonnes), France (2,216 tonnes) and Estonia (2,026 tonnes) took a relatively small share of total imports.

Imports into Germany decreased at an average annual rate of -2.3% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, the Netherlands (+13.8%), Romania (+12.9%) and the UK (+3.2%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, the Netherlands emerged as the fastest-growing importer in the European Union, with a CAGR of +13.8% from 2007-2018. Poland and France experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, the Czech Republic (-2.1%), Denmark (-2.3%), Austria (-2.6%), Estonia (-4.8%), Sweden (-5.0%) and Finland (-5.4%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2007 to 2018, the share of the Netherlands, Romania and Poland increased by +4.9%, +1.8% and +1.6% percentage points, while Finland (-2.4 p.p.), Sweden (-3.8 p.p.) and Germany (-11.3 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

Import Prices by Country

The herring import price in the European Union stood at $2,840 per tonne in 2018, waning by -4.4% against the previous year. In general, the herring import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Austria ($4,240 per tonne), while Sweden ($1,781 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Finland, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

equine leather

Italy’s Exports of Bovine Leather into China Continues to Decline

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Italy – Leather Of Bovine And Equine Animals – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the bovine and equine leather market in Italy amounted to $1.8B in 2018, therefore, remained relatively stable against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). In general, bovine and equine leather consumption continues to indicate a mild descent. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2013 with an increase of 43% against the previous year. Bovine and equine leather consumption peaked at $2.4B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, consumption stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Production in Italy

In 2018, the amount of leather of bovine and equine animals produced in Italy totaled 428K tonnes, falling by -7.4% against the previous year. Over the period under review, bovine and equine leather production continues to indicate a mild contraction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2013 with an increase of 21% against the previous year. Bovine and equine leather production peaked at 522K tonnes in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, production stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, bovine and equine leather production amounted to $1.7B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Over the period under review, bovine and equine leather production continues to indicate a slight deduction. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2013 when production volume increased by 44% year-to-year. Bovine and equine leather production peaked at $1.9B in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, production stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports from Italy

In 2018, the amount of leather of bovine and equine animals exported from Italy amounted to 283K tonnes, waning by -2.7% against the previous year. Overall, bovine and equine leather exports continue to indicate a significant deduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when exports increased by 13% year-to-year. Exports peaked at 410K tonnes in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, bovine and equine leather exports stood at $3.5B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, bovine and equine leather exports continue to indicate a mild decline. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 19% year-to-year. Exports peaked at $4.2B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports by Country

China (92K tonnes) was the main destination for bovine and equine leather exports from Italy, accounting for a 32% share of total exports. Moreover, bovine and equine leather exports to China exceeded the volume sent to the second major destination, Viet Nam (36K tonnes), threefold. Spain (18K tonnes) ranked third in terms of total exports with a 6.2% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume to China amounted to -1.2%. Exports to the other major destinations recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: Viet Nam (+15.7% per year) and Spain (-3.0% per year).

In value terms, the largest markets for bovine and equine leather exported from Italy were Romania ($284M), China, Hong Kong SAR ($265M) and the U.S. ($247M), with a combined 23% share of total exports. These countries were followed by Viet Nam, China, Spain, Poland, France, Germany, Portugal, India and Austria, which together accounted for a further 41%.

In terms of the main countries of destination, Viet Nam experienced the highest growth rate of exports, over the last eleven years, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The average bovine and equine leather export price stood at $12,383 per tonne in 2018, growing by 5% against the previous year. Over the period from 2007 to 2018, it increased at an average annual rate of +1.9%. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2012 an increase of 21% year-to-year. The export price peaked at $14,278 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, export prices remained at a lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was the U.S. ($33,326 per tonne), while the average price for exports to China ($2,238 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to Romania, while the prices for the other major destinations experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports into Italy

In 2018, approx. 318K tonnes of leather of bovine and equine animals were imported into Italy; remaining constant against the previous year. Over the period under review, bovine and equine leather imports continue to indicate a temperate decrease. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2010 when imports increased by 19% y-o-y. Over the period under review, bovine and equine leather imports attained their maximum at 441K tonnes in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, bovine and equine leather imports amounted to $1.7B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Over the period under review, bovine and equine leather imports continue to indicate a moderate reduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 50% y-o-y. Imports peaked at $2.4B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

Imports by Country

In 2018, Brazil (90K tonnes) constituted the largest bovine and equine leather supplier to Italy, with a 28% share of total imports. Moreover, bovine and equine leather imports from Brazil exceeded the figures recorded by the second-largest supplier, the U.S. (38K tonnes), twofold. Paraguay (20K tonnes) ranked third in terms of total imports with a 6.2% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume from Brazil stood at -1.6%. The remaining supplying countries recorded the following average annual rates of imports growth: the U.S. (+0.4% per year) and Paraguay (+15.7% per year).

In value terms, Brazil ($319M), the U.S. ($209M) and Russia ($130M) constituted the largest bovine and equine leather suppliers to Italy, with a combined 40% share of total imports. These countries were followed by New Zealand, the UK, Paraguay, Ukraine, South Africa, Australia, Kenya, Bolivia and Venezuela, which together accounted for a further 18%.

Paraguay experienced the highest growth rate of imports, among the main suppliers over the last eleven years, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The average bovine and equine leather import price stood at $5,216 per tonne in 2018, declining by -1.8% against the previous year. In general, the bovine and equine leather import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2010 an increase of 27% against the previous year. The import price peaked at $5,755 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major supplying countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Russia ($10,205 per tonne), while the price for Venezuela ($1,538 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Russia, while the prices for the other major suppliers experienced more modest paces of growth.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

potatoes

UK’s Dependence on Imports of Frozen Potatoes Increases Markedly

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘United Kingdom – Frozen Potatoes – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the frozen potato market in the UK amounted to $1.5B in 2018, declining by -2.1% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). Over the period under review, frozen potato consumption, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. Over the period under review, the frozen potato market reached its maximum level at $1.7B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, consumption stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Production in the UK

In 2018, approx. 458K tonnes of frozen potatoes were produced in the UK; approximately mirroring the previous year. Overall, frozen potato production continues to indicate a moderate contraction. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2012 when production volume increased by 6.1% against the previous year. In that year, frozen potato production attained its peak volume of 657K tonnes. From 2013 to 2018, frozen potato production growth failed to regain its momentum. In value terms, frozen potato production amounted to $651M in 2018 estimated in export prices.

Imports into the UK

In 2018, the amount of frozen potatoes imported into the UK totaled 663K tonnes which remained relatively stable against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +4.2% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Over the period under review, frozen potato imports reached their maximum in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the near future. In value terms, frozen potato imports amounted to $641M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Imports by Country

The Netherlands (370K tonnes) and Belgium (268K tonnes) constitute the main suppliers of frozen potato imports to the UK, with a combined 96% share of total imports.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main suppliers, was attained by Belgium.

In value terms, the Netherlands ($359M) and Belgium ($255M) appeared to be the largest frozen potato suppliers to the UK, together comprising 96% of total imports.

Import Prices by Country

The average frozen potato import price stood at $967 per tonne in 2018, picking up by 5.6% against the previous year. Overall, the frozen potato import price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. Over the period under review, the average import prices for frozen potatoes attained their peak figure at $1,094 per tonne in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices remained at a lower figure.

Average prices varied noticeably amongst the major supplying countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was the Netherlands ($969 per tonne), while the price for Belgium stood at $954 per tonne. From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Belgium.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

EU Mixed Fruit and Vegetable Juice Market – France Is the Largest and Fastest-Growing Consumer

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘EU – Mixtures Of Fruit And Vegetable Juices – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the mixed juices market in the European Union amounted to $3B in 2018, flattening at the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). In general, mixed juices consumption continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2011 with an increase of 11% against the previous year. The level of mixed juices consumption peaked at $3.2B in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, consumption stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Consumption By Country in the EU

The countries with the highest volumes of mixed juices consumption in 2018 were Germany (539K tonnes), France (496K tonnes) and the UK (413K tonnes), together comprising 63% of total consumption.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of mixed juices consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by France, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, France ($670M), the UK ($648M) and Germany ($578M) were the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2018, with a combined 64% share of the total market.

The countries with the highest levels of mixed juices per capita consumption in 2018 were France (7,591 kg per 1000 persons), Germany (6,555 kg per 1000 persons) and the UK (6,188 kg per 1000 persons).

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of mixed juices per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by France, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Production in the EU

In 2018, the amount of mixtures of fruit and vegetable juices produced in the European Union amounted to 2.2M tonnes, reducing by -7.6% against the previous year. In general, mixed juices production continues to indicate a mild deduction. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2016 when production volume increased by 6% y-o-y. Over the period under review, mixed juices production reached its peak figure volume at 2.5M tonnes in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, production stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, mixed juices production totaled $2.5B in 2018 estimated in export prices. In general, mixed juices production continues to indicate a temperate downturn. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2011 with an increase of 14% against the previous year. Over the period under review, mixed juices production attained its peak figure level at $3.1B in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum.

Production By Country in the EU

The countries with the highest volumes of mixed juices production in 2018 were Germany (631K tonnes), the Netherlands (349K tonnes) and France (245K tonnes), together accounting for 55% of total production.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of mixed juices production, amongst the main producing countries, was attained by France, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Exports in the EU

In 2018, the mixed juices exports in the European Union stood at 960K tonnes, picking up by 7.6% against the previous year. The total exports indicated a strong increase from 2008 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +4.8% over the last decade. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, mixed juices exports increased by +72.2% against 2015 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 with an increase of 33% against the previous year. Over the period under review, mixed juices exports reached their peak figure in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the near future.

In value terms, mixed juices exports stood at $1.2B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total exports indicated conspicuous growth from 2008 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +4.8% over the last decade. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, mixed juices exports increased by +86.4% against 2015 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 with an increase of 30% against the previous year. The level of exports peaked in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the near future.

Exports by Country

The Netherlands (334K tonnes) and Germany (243K tonnes) represented the main exporters of mixtures of fruit and vegetable juices in 2018, amounting to approx. 35% and 25% of total exports, respectively. It was distantly followed by Spain (110K tonnes), Belgium (67K tonnes) and the UK (58K tonnes), together making up a 24% share of total exports. France (38K tonnes) and Poland (24K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main exporting countries, was attained by the UK, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the Netherlands ($420M), Germany ($262M) and Spain ($136M) were the countries with the highest levels of exports in 2018, together accounting for 69% of total exports. These countries were followed by the UK, Belgium, France and Poland, which together accounted for a further 21%.

In terms of the main exporting countries, the UK recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, over the last decade, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The mixed juices export price in the European Union stood at $1,233 per tonne in 2018, surging by 12% against the previous year. Overall, the mixed juices export price, however, continues to indicate a mild descent. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when the export price increased by 14% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the export prices for mixtures of fruit and vegetable juices reached their maximum at $1,436 per tonne in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, export prices remained at a lower figure.

Average prices varied somewhat amongst the major exporting countries. In 2018, major exporting countries recorded the following prices: in the UK ($1,568 per tonne) and France ($1,284 per tonne), while Germany ($1,076 per tonne) and Poland ($1,103 per tonne) were amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Spain, while the other leaders experienced mixed trends in the export price figures.

Imports in the EU

In 2018, the amount of mixtures of fruit and vegetable juices imported in the European Union stood at 1.1M tonnes, surging by 9.8% against the previous year. The total imports indicated a resilient increase from 2008 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +6.6% over the last decade. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, mixed juices imports increased by +86.8% against 2012 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 with an increase of 46% against the previous year. The volume of imports peaked in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, mixed juices imports totaled $1.1B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total imports indicated a strong expansion from 2008 to 2018: its value increased at an average annual rate of +6.6% over the last decade. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, mixed juices imports increased by +60.7% against 2015 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 with an increase of 44% year-to-year. The level of imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the near future.

Imports by Country

The UK (292K tonnes) and France (289K tonnes) represented roughly 55% of total imports of mixtures of fruit and vegetable juices in 2018. Germany (151K tonnes) ranks next in terms of the total imports with a 14% share, followed by the Netherlands (5.5%) and Belgium (4.9%). Sweden (30K tonnes), Austria (24K tonnes), Denmark (21K tonnes), Portugal (19K tonnes), Spain (17K tonnes) and Poland (16K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by the UK, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest mixed juices importing markets in the European Union were France ($277M), the UK ($252M) and Germany ($202M), with a combined 65% share of total imports.

The UK recorded the highest rates of growth with regard to imports, among the main importing countries over the last decade, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the mixed juices import price in the European Union amounted to $1,071 per tonne, remaining stable against the previous year. In general, the mixed juices import price, however, continues to indicate a moderate reduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 when the import price increased by 9.3% year-to-year. The level of import price peaked at $1,365 per tonne in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, import prices failed to regain their momentum.

There were significant differences in the average prices amongst the major importing countries. In 2018, the country with the highest price was Poland ($1,575 per tonne), while Portugal ($715 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2008 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Denmark, while the other leaders experienced mixed trends in the import price figures.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

e-commerce

5 Must-Have Features of Enterprise E-Commerce

E-commerce is everywhere — unless, of course, you look in the B2B space. Unfortunately, one segment lags behind all the rest when it comes to online sales: manufacturers. Just 38% of manufacturers have e-commerce websites, and only 6% of all manufacturer sales come through this particular channel. 

Part of the reason manufacturers are so slow to adopt e-commerce can be traced back to the old adage “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The traditional ways of doing business largely haven’t posed a problem yet, so many manufacturers don’t feel a real sense of urgency to explore the increasingly relevant direct-to-consumer model. 

It also has a lot to do with technical hurdles. For many manufacturers, moving to e-commerce involves taking on yet one more system to master — that or an expensive integration with their current enterprise resource planning (ERP) software. It’s nearly impossible to get an e-commerce platform to talk to an old “closed” mainframe, so plans to upgrade often involve a two-year timeframe or longer to get everything up and running. They might also involve a million-dollar price tag. Not surprisingly, this tends to put e-commerce on the back burner pretty quickly. 

And it’s important to note, too, that most manufacturers work through distributors and dealers, making e-commerce seem like nothing more than a mere alternative to their current traditional sales channels. 

A Missed Opportunity

What many manufacturers seem to be missing, though, is that B2B customers are also B2C customers. Chances are that they’re already shopping online for their personal needs, and not having a way to buy their business products and services online can have a hefty negative impact on the customer experience. If you’re manufacturing a commodity product and your sales process lacks the convenience of shopping for that product online, your customers might begin to look elsewhere. 

Remaining passive about e-commerce is simply the wrong approach, especially with B2B buyers moving more of their purchases online all the time. As it stands, nearly half of all companies utilize online channels for 50% to 74% of all their corporate purchases. Not being online just means you’ve missed out on an opportunity — not only to secure additional sales, but also to broaden your reach to a global level

Also, remember that it’s easier than ever for competition and new players in the market to get in front of your customers via Google, Facebook, and email. Not having an e-commerce site could easily cost you market share, even if the competition’s product isn’t as good as yours.

Beyond the Basics

Knowing that it isn’t enough to conduct all business offline, know, too, that it isn’t enough to just invest in getting an e-commerce platform, leave it there, and call it good. Your site has to offer the functionalities necessary to run an online business. If your system doesn’t support multiple pricing tiers, it probably also doesn’t mimic your current sales process. Clearly, that’s not a good thing. 

Your site needs to be able to support multiple buying options, such as “requests for quotes” as opposed to a shopping cart model. It can take time to arrive at a number in a complex B2B transaction, and the last thing you want is for a customer to have to take the interaction offline just to finalize scope and nail down specifics. 

This naturally leads to my next point. Assuming your e-commerce site comes equipped with all the basics like browse, add to cart, checkout, email confirmation, etc., there are a few features to look out for at the enterprise level. Those often include the following:

System integration options

In e-commerce, a certain amount of coordination is necessary between the website itself and your back-end system that you use for inventory and accounting purposes. Without proper integration, order fulfillment can easily get problematic. Focus on maintenance, data input, and offering a seamless user experience. Most of all, understand all the system integration options of your marketplace website before going with one provider over another.

Proper data to support search

Product information is important. It’s what consumers see prior to making a purchase decision. But it can sometimes pale in comparison to the product data used behind the scenes. A number of data fields and HTML tags enable your products and website to rank in both Google and on-site search results. Make sure your platform accommodates these options. Also, inquire about the tracking capabilities of your on-site search function. It can be useful to monitor what users found — and didn’t find — during a visit.

Customer tiers

At the enterprise level, you’ll likely run across different types of customers. Being able to segment these customers into various tiers can come in handy. Based on their purchase history, for example, you might determine that one tier would respond well to a certain promotion while another’s browsing behavior could inform subsequent product recommendations. In other words, segmenting tiers allows you to personalize your messaging, pricing, and other marketing efforts to fit the needs of your customers. So look into this functionality while reviewing your e-commerce options.

Analytics integration

Whether you’re looking at an off-the-shelf platform or a custom solution, reporting is very important. At a bare minimum, make sure a standard tool like Google Analytics can be integrated with your e-commerce system. You’ll also want to inquire about the setup of advanced features like e-commerce tracking.

Merchandising

Generally, any platform you go with will provide the functionality of assigning products to categories. This can help with on-site search and make it easier for visitors to browse your product line. Beyond that, you might wish to feature certain products. The question, then, is what ability do you have in the platform to create banner ads, highlight related products on a product page, create landing pages around a spotlight topic for the month, and feature products in other ways? 

Providing a good online experience naturally makes customers feel good about doing business with you. It also increases the likelihood of driving new customers to your business without needing to invest in additional resources. 

Ultimately, you can handle more transactions with an e-commerce site in your corner. Just make sure your site provides you with all of the functionalities you need to keep your business running smoothly and your customers happy. 

____________________________________________________________

Michael Bird is the CEO of Spindustry, a digital agency focused on e-commerce, SharePoint portals, and enterprise websites. He has almost 30 years of experience in interactive development, user behavior, and business solutions. His successful agency, Spindustry, puts these strategies into practice to help businesses grow.

pesticide

Pesticide Imports into the U.S. Expand Rapidly Against Large But Stagnating Domestic Output

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘U.S. Pesticide And Other Agricultural Chemicals Market. Analysis And Forecast to 2025’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the pesticide and agricultural chemical market in the U.S. amounted to $14B in 2018, waning by -3% against the previous year. This figure reflects the total revenues of producers and importers (excluding logistics costs, retail marketing costs, and retailers’ margins, which will be included in the final consumer price). Overall, pesticide and agricultural chemical consumption continues to indicate a moderate reduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2016 when the market value increased by 5.6% y-o-y. Pesticide and agricultural chemical consumption peaked at $16.2B in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, consumption stood at a somewhat lower figure.

The Market For Pesticides And Other Agricultural Chemicals in the U.S. Is Buoyed By Domestic Products

In value terms, pesticide and agricultural chemical production stood at $14B in 2018. The U.S. market is largely supplied by domestic products, therefore the trend patterns of the consumption volumes and production volumes generally reflect each other.

Exports from the U.S.

In 2018, the exports of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals from the U.S. stood at 63K tonnes, jumping by 6.4% against the previous year. Over the period under review, pesticide and agricultural chemical exports, however, continue to indicate a deep downturn. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 when exports increased by 17% year-to-year. In that year, pesticide and agricultural chemical exports attained their peak of 102K tonnes. From 2015 to 2018, the growth of pesticide and agricultural chemical exports remained at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, pesticide and agricultural chemical exports totaled $1.4B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2018 when exports increased by 36% against the previous year. In that year, pesticide and agricultural chemical exports reached their peak and are likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Exports by Country

Brazil (11K tonnes), Canada (9.1K tonnes) and Mexico (6.6K tonnes) were the main destinations of pesticide and agricultural chemical exports from the U.S., with a combined 41% share of total exports. The UK, South Africa, Costa Rica, India, France, Belgium, Colombia, Peru and China lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 33%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main countries of destination, was attained by the UK (+92.8% per year), while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Brazil ($393M), Canada ($204M) and Mexico ($149M) were the largest markets for pesticide and agricultural chemical exported from the U.S. worldwide, together accounting for 52% of total exports. These countries were followed by the UK, France, China, India, Colombia, South Africa, Costa Rica, Belgium and Peru, which together accounted for a further 22%.

India recorded the highest growth rate of exports, among the main countries of destination over the last eleven-year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports into the U.S.

Pesticide and agricultural chemical imports into the U.S. totaled 62K tonnes in 2018, jumping by 15% against the previous year. Overall, the total imports indicated buoyant growth from 2013 to 2018: its volume increased at an average annual rate of +11.2% over the last five years. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. Based on 2018 figures, pesticide and agricultural chemical imports increased by +88.6% against 2014 indices. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 when imports increased by 22% y-o-y. Imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, pesticide and agricultural chemical imports totaled $433M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Overall, pesticide and agricultural chemical imports continue to indicate a resilient expansion. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 with an increase of 81% year-to-year. Over the period under review, pesticide and agricultural chemical imports attained their maximum in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the near future.

The share of imports in terms of total consumption increased rapidly over the last two years and reached 6% in 2018. The largest increase refers to supplies from China and Mexico. Despite the tangible growth those figures, however, are still insignificant against the volume of domestic production.

Imports by Country

China (18K tonnes), Mexico (13K tonnes) and France (6.9K tonnes) were the main suppliers of pesticide and agricultural chemical imports to the U.S., together comprising 61% of total imports. These countries were followed by India, Israel, Germany, Italy, Chile and Belgium, which together accounted for a further 29%.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main suppliers, was attained by Israel (+86.9% per year), while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, China ($140M) constituted the largest supplier of pesticide and agricultural chemical to the U.S., comprising 32% of total pesticide and agricultural chemical imports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Mexico ($55M), with a 13% share of total imports. It was followed by France, with a 9% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual growth rate of value from China amounted to +38.3%. The remaining supplying countries recorded the following average annual rates of imports growth: Mexico (+29.3% per year) and France (+10.9% per year).

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

phase one

The Phase One Deal: How We Got Here And What Is Next

President Trump announced that the United States and China had reached a partial “Phase One” trade deal in mid-October, signaling a pause in the trade tensions that have steadily grown over the past two and half years.  While the precise goals of the President’s trade action against China have always been vague, there was an unquestionable desire to change certain structural issues of the Chinese economy, particularly with the country’s intellectual property and forced technology practices.  

To put the proposed Phase One deal in its proper context, this article breaks down (1) the various stages of escalation since President Trump took office, (2) what’s known about the contents of agreement, and (3) the potential risks that could derail the deal from being signed.  

The Escalation of the Trade War

The President’s most high-profile actions against China have been his use of long-thought-defunct trade authority, Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (“Section 301”).  Section 301 grants the President the authority to impose tariffs on countries if it determines that the acts, policies, or practices of a country are unjustifiable and burden or restrict U.S. commerce.  

Following a lengthy investigation, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”) officially determined in March 2018 that China’s policies result in harm to the U.S. economy.  Simultaneously, President Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum outlining a series of remedies that his Administration would take in response to these findings, most notably the imposition of tariffs.  

President Trump’s Section 301 tariffs currently cover most products imported from China, after having been rolled out in four different lists:  

-List 1 of the Section 301 tariffs went into effect July 2018 and imposes a 25 percent tariff on $34 billion worth of goods from China.  

-List 2 went into effect August 2018 and imposes a 25 percent tariff on $16 billion worth of goods.  

-Following China’s retaliatory tariffs on Lists 1 and 2, the United States announced List 3, which began imposing a 10 percent tariff on $200 billion of Chinese products in September 2018.  The List 3 tariffs were increased to 25 percent after negotiations between the two countries fell apart.

-List 4 could hit almost $300 billion more of Chinese products.  Part of the list (“List 4a”) went into effect on September 1 and imposes 15 percent tariffs on $112 billion of Chinese products.  The U.S. is scheduled to impose 15 percent tariffs on the remaining $160 billion of the list (“List 4b”) starting December 15.  

The Trump Administration has taken aggressive action to increase pressure on China that goes well beyond the Section 301 tariffs.  Since President Trump took office, he has targeted China’s steel and aluminum industries through global tariffs on these products. He has (at least temporarily) sanctioned major Chinese tech firms or restricted their ability to do business with the United States.  He has sanctioned Chinese individuals and entities connected to North Korea and others related to the treatment of the Uighurs in western China. He signed into law a major expansion of authority for the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”), which has immediate and future implications for Chinese investment in the United States. 

Additionally, the Administration has moved closer to Taiwan. President Trump has authorized significant military sales to Taiwan, and as President-elect, he took a call from Taiwan’s leader Tsai Ing-wen, the first such call by a U.S. President or President-elect since the 1970s. The Administration has either directly or indirectly made clear that these restrictions, sanctions, and geopolitical relationships can be used as points of leverage in the trade negotiations.  

The Phase One Deal

Many details about what is included in the Phase One deal remain unknown.  In announcing the deal, President Trump said “We have a great deal. We’re papering it now.  Over the next three or four or five weeks, hopefully, it’ll get finished. A tremendous benefit to our farmers, technology, and many other things — the banking industry, financial services.”  As the two sides “paper” the agreement into finalized text, what is known about the deal has come largely from statements made by both sides. We know that as part of the deal, the United States will not pursue plans to increase the List 1-3 tariffs from 25 percent to 30 percent. We also know China plans to make large purchases of U.S. agricultural products.  

There are reports the Phase One deal could also delay or cancel the planned List 4b tariffs. Other reports suggest that China is seeking additional eliminations or reductions of the Section 301 tariffs.  

As for the structural changes to the Chinese economy sought by the Trump Administration, it seems as though they could be mentioned in the Phase One deal, but the real work will be addressed in subsequent phases.  

What Comes Next

The stars were aligning for President Trump and President Xi to sign the Phase One deal at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (“APEC”) meetings in Santiago, Chile this week.  Unfortunately, the APEC meetings were unexpectedly cancelled due to protests in the country, highlighting that a few weeks can feel like an eternity for sensitive trade talks.  

Assuming the U.S. and China can find another location, there are still risks out there that could prevent the deal’s signing.  

One big risk to the deal is the events unfolding in Hong Kong. The Trump Administration has been notably quiet on the protests, outside of President Trump expressing his faith in President Xi to satisfactorily resolve the situation.  The strongest statement from the Administration came from Vice President Pence, who recently said, “[T]he United States will continue to urge China to show restraint, to honor its commitments, and respect the people of Hong Kong.  And to the millions in Hong Kong who have been peacefully demonstrating to protect your rights these past months, we stand with you.”

According to multiple reports, President Trump pledged to Chinese President Xi Jinping that his Administration would remain quiet on the Hong Kong protests throughout the trade talks.  However, the Administration’s hand could be forced if the protests escalate into more sustained violence or if, as is expected, Congress passes legislation in support of Hong Kong with veto-proof majorities.  

Another risk is more vocal opposition from so-called “China hawks” that are dissatisfied that Phase One doesn’t get to the heart of the problems they have with China’s economic practices.  Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) cautioned the President that he “shouldn’t be giving in to China unless we get something big in return.” Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) doubted China’s commitment to the deal long-term, saying, “I do believe that [China] will agree to things they don’t intend to comply with.” There are reports that China hawks within the White House are also pushing the President to reject the deal, notably Director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Peter Navarro.  

A deal to end or pause the trade tensions between the United States and China would provide the private sector with more certainty as they make decisions about 2020 and beyond.  The Phase One deal looks to provide at least a pause, but geopolitical actions or domestic opposition could still derail the agreement before it is signed.   

___________________________________________________________

Rory Murphy is an Associate at Squire Patton Boggs, where his practice focuses on providing US public policy guidance, global cultural and business diplomacy advice that helps US and foreign governments and entities with doing business around the globe.