New Articles

HELIUM SHORTAGE BURSTING MORE THAN BALLOONS

balloons

HELIUM SHORTAGE BURSTING MORE THAN BALLOONS

From birthday parties to baby showers and the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade, balloons are a staple when it comes to party decor and celebrations.

Created by British inventor Michael Faraday in 1824, rubber balloons were first manufactured in the United States in 1907. The rubber balloon was followed by the introduction of the twistable balloon animal in the late 1930s and shiny foil balloons in the 1970s.

More recently, air-filled lettered and numbered balloons are making a big splash. While these trendy balloon displays look good on Instagram, there’s another reason party store retailers promote them. They don’t require a critical ingredient the world is running short on: helium.

Helium is far bigger than balloons

We all know helium’s use in balloons. Less well known are helium’s more serious roles in the functioning of an array of products including MRI machines, the processing of semiconductors chips, scuba tanks and even rocket engines. Liquid helium is inert and has the lowest boiling point of all liquid gasses, making it a critical ingredient for scientific experiments. Helium is so important it was listed as one of 35 mineral commodities deemed critical to the economic and national security of the United States.

Heliums many different uses

An elusive gas

Helium is a bit of an enigma. Although it’s the second-most abundant element in the universe, helium is a finite resource on Earth — meaning it is non-renewable and we could run out of it someday. Helium is so light that is rises into space, so we can only recover it when it’s trapped in rocks below the earth’s crust where it mixes with natural gas.

There’s only a tiny amount of helium found concentrated in natural gas fields (anything greater than 0.3 percent is considered good). Helium is extracted as a byproduct during natural gas production where crude helium is separated from natural gas using a cryogenic distillation method and then refined for commercial use. The liquid helium must be transported and shipped around the world in specially-designed International Organization for Standardization (ISO) tankers that are triple-walled and sealed.

Most helium comes from just three places

The helium supply chain is concentrated primarily in three places. Seventy-five percent of the world’s helium comes from Texas, Wyoming and Qatar.

The United States has been the world’s dominant producer of helium for nearly 100 years, starting with the launch of the Federal Helium Reserve (FHR) in 1925. The FHR is in charge of the conservation and sale of federally owned helium. The Bureau of Land Management manages a helium storage reservoir, an enrichment plant and pipeline system in Amarillo, Texas. The Amarillo plant alone has the capacity to provide 40 percent of U.S. domestic helium demand and 30 percent of global helium demand.

But the U.S. government has been gradually selling off its helium supplies in Texas and will fully deplete its reserves by 2021. This plan started in 1996 with the Helium Privatization Act, which mandated that the U.S. government sell off its helium reserves by 2013 because the FHR had stockpiled over one billion cubic meters of helium and was $1.3 billion in debt.

The original deadline was extended by the Helium Stewardship Act of 2013 which President Obama signed to stop the impending helium shortage and continue selling helium from the FHR until 2021. The HSA created an auction system to gradually auction off the FHR’s helium reserves to private bidders. The fifth and final auction was held last year.

Helium history timeline

Global trade in helium

With the U.S. government exiting the helium business, one nation in particular has stepped in to supply the world’s helium: Qatar. Qatar is the world’s second-largest helium producer behind the United States, producing 28 percent of the world’s helium supply in 2018. Other countries that produce helium include Algeria, Australia, Canada, China, Poland and Russia.
Qatar helium supply chain imports

Qatar is the top source for U.S. helium imports, supplying 80 percent of U.S. helium imports last year. But relying on Qatar for helium imports has its downsides. In 2017, the country was embargoed by four of its neighbors – Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. Its helium plants were temporarily shuttered as a result and the world lost access to one-fourth of its helium supply overnight.

Qatar’s helium plants have since come back online but the ongoing embargo calls into question the reliability of Qatar as a stable source of helium imports.

Helium shortage bursting balloons everywhere

With all of the uncertainty in the helium supply chain and so few sources available, pricing has been volatile and shortages over the last ten years have been common.

Party supply stores have taken a hit. Party City recently announced it was planning to close 45 stores this year and that helium shortages were negatively impacting balloon sales. Things may be looking up for the retailer which said they’ve secured a new helium source that should keep them afloat in the gas for the next 2.5 years. However, they do still recommend switching to air-filled party balloon displays due to the global helium shortage.

While your party balloons may be safe for now, the long-term stability of trade in helium is still up in the air. The United States could soon go from helium exporter to importer as FHR reserves deflate. And prices are likely to increase until more helium sources come online in places like Russia, Canada and possibly even Tanzania to meet global demand.

One thing is for sure, while party balloons may have short lifespan before deflating — MRIs, semiconductors and rockets are here to stay. A stable helium supply chain is the only way to keep the party going for our critical medical, scientific and defense fields.

_______________________________________________________________

Lauren Kyger

Lauren Kyger is Associate Editor for TradeVistas. Prior to joining TradeVistas, she was a Research Associate at the Hinrich Foundation focused on international trade issues. She is a Hinrich Foundation Global Trade Leader Scholar alumna, earning her Master’s degree in Global Business Journalism from Tsinghua University in Beijing. She received her Bachelor’s degree from the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University.

This article originally appeared on TradeVistas.org. Republished with permission.

solar panel commerce

Tigers Caters to Solar Panel Demands with Added Energy Vertical

Tigers announced the addition of a renewables energy-focused vertical to its South African operations, following the opening of its e-commerce facility in the region. The energy vertical will cater to solar panel imports from China through added customs brokerage, local logistics, and warehouse storage.

“These are exciting times for Tigers as we move into the renewable energy sector, which is a growing market, especially in South Africa,” said Paul Lawrence, Managing Dire

“As with the recently opened Tigers e-commerce facility in South Africa, the renewable energy vertical is in line with our progressive approach to freight forwarding and embracing new markets.”

To further support efforts in the evolving sector in South Africa, Tigers also confirmed partnering with the region’s primary manufacturers, including energy solutions company, Energy Partners. Tigers will oversee the distribution of solar panel imports once shipped to Cape Town and Durban, adding to its extensive logistics portfolio.

“In South Africa, there are frequent power failures, and with such high levels of sunshine in the region it makes sense for people to invest in solar power generation,” continued Lawrence.

“We expect the market for renewable energy to continue to grow in the coming years, and Tigers is ready for the demand.”

Credit: Tigers
cotton fabric

Asia’s Cotton Fabric Market – China Still Dominates Exports, Despite a Raging Trade War

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Asia – Woven Fabrics Of Cotton – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the cotton fabric market in Asia amounted to $43.9B in 2018, increasing by 2% 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, cotton fabric consumption continues to indicate a measured drop. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when the market value increased by 6.4% against the previous year. The level of cotton fabric consumption peaked at $57.9B in 2009; however, from 2010 to 2018, consumption remained at a lower figure.

Consumption By Country in Asia

China (1.9B square meters) remains the largest cotton fabric consuming country in Asia, accounting for 32% of total consumption. Moreover, cotton fabric consumption in China exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest consumer, Bangladesh (869M square meters), twofold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by Turkey (819M square meters), with a 13% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume in China totaled -1.6%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Bangladesh (+15.7% per year) and Turkey (-0.4% per year).

In value terms, the largest cotton fabric markets in Asia were China ($13B), India ($9.7B) and Bangladesh ($4.9B), with a combined 63% share of the total market.

The countries with the highest levels of cotton fabric per capita consumption in 2018 were Turkey (9,988 square meters per 1000 persons), Bangladesh (5,219 square meters per 1000 persons) and Viet Nam (2,483 square meters per 1000 persons).

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of cotton fabric per capita consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Bangladesh, while the other leaders experienced a decline in the per capita consumption figures.

Production in Asia

In 2018, the production of woven fabrics of cotton in Asia totaled 6.2B square meters, going down by -4.2% against the previous year. Overall, cotton fabric production continues to indicate a measured deduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 when production volume increased by 10% against the previous year. The volume of cotton fabric production peaked at 8.2B square meters in 2010; however, from 2011 to 2018, production stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, cotton fabric production stood at $46.9B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Over the period under review, cotton fabric production continues to indicate a mild decrease. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2015 with an increase of 5.9% year-to-year. Over the period under review, cotton fabric production attained its peak figure level at $59.6B in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum.

Production By Country in Asia

China (3.1B square meters) remains the largest cotton fabric producing country in Asia, accounting for 50% of total production. Moreover, cotton fabric production in China exceeded the figures recorded by the region’s second-largest producer, Turkey (833M square meters), fourfold. The third position in this ranking was occupied by India (792M square meters), with a 13% share.

In China, cotton fabric production remained relatively stable over the period from 2007-2018. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Turkey (+0.1% per year) and India (-5.8% per year).

Exports in Asia

In 2018, the exports of woven fabrics of cotton in Asia totaled 2.2B square meters, leveling off at the previous year. Overall, cotton fabric exports continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 44% against the previous year. Over the period under review, cotton fabric exports attained their maximum at 2.8B square meters in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, cotton fabric exports stood at $15.6B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. In general, cotton fabric exports continue to indicate a slight reduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when exports increased by 23% y-o-y. The level of exports peaked at $22.8B in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, exports remained at a lower figure.

Exports by Country

In 2018, China (1.2B square meters) was the major exporter of woven fabrics of cotton, making up 56% of total exports. It was distantly followed by Pakistan (422M square meters), India (118M square meters) and Turkey (109M square meters), together generating a 29% share of total exports. China, Hong Kong SAR (97M square meters) followed a long way behind the leaders.

Exports from China increased at an average annual rate of +2.9% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Pakistan emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in Asia, with a CAGR of +5.9% from 2007-2018. India and Turkey experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, China, Hong Kong SAR (-13.6%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2007 to 2018, the share of China and Pakistan increased by +15% and +8.9% percentage points, while China, Hong Kong SAR (-17.7 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, China ($7.9B) remains the largest cotton fabric supplier in Asia, comprising 51% of total cotton fabric exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Pakistan ($2.2B), with a 14% share of total exports. It was followed by India, with a 12% share.

In China, cotton fabric exports remained relatively stable over the period from 2007-2018. The remaining exporting countries recorded the following average annual rates of exports growth: Pakistan (+1.1% per year) and India (+6.2% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The cotton fabric export price in Asia stood at $7,047 per thousand square meters in 2018, going up by 9.8% against the previous year. Overall, the cotton fabric export price, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2011 when the export price increased by 12% against the previous year. The level of export price peaked at $8,452 per thousand square meters in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, export prices remained at a lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was India ($15,533 per thousand square meters), while Pakistan ($5,150 per thousand square meters) was amongst the lowest.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by India, while the other leaders experienced mixed trends in the export price figures.

Imports in Asia

In 2018, approx. 2.1B square meters of woven fabrics of cotton were imported in Asia; increasing by 4.9% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.1% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2017 when imports increased by 42% year-to-year. Over the period under review, cotton fabric imports attained their peak figure in 2018 and are likely to continue its growth in the near future.

In value terms, cotton fabric imports stood at $11.8B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +1.2% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 when imports increased by 36% against the previous year. The level of imports peaked at $13.8B in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

Imports by Country

Bangladesh represented the major importer of woven fabrics of cotton in Asia, with the volume of imports reaching 873M square meters, which was near 42% of total imports in 2018. Viet Nam (257M square meters) held a 12% share (based on tonnes) of total imports, which put it in second place, followed by China, Hong Kong SAR (5.1%), Indonesia (5%), Cambodia (5%) and Turkey (4.5%). China (94M square meters), Sri Lanka (72M square meters), South Korea (65M square meters), Thailand (43M square meters), the United Arab Emirates (37M square meters) and Japan (36M square meters) took a little share of total imports.

From 2007 to 2018, average annual rates of growth with regard to cotton fabric imports into Bangladesh stood at +15.3%. Cambodia (+20.8%), Viet Nam (+13.7%), Indonesia (+9.6%) and the United Arab Emirates (+3.2%) also displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Cambodia emerged as the fastest-growing importer in Asia, with a CAGR of +20.8% from 2007-2018. Sri Lanka experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, Thailand (-1.4%), South Korea (-2.2%), Turkey (-3.9%), Japan (-4.2%), China (-8.9%) and China, Hong Kong SAR (-12.4%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. Bangladesh (+33 p.p.), Viet Nam (+9.3 p.p.), Cambodia (+4.4 p.p.) and Indonesia (+3.2 p.p.) significantly strengthened its position in terms of the total imports, while Turkey, China and China, Hong Kong SAR saw its share reduced by -2.5%, -8% and -16.8% from 2007 to 2018, respectively. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the largest cotton fabric importing markets in Asia were Bangladesh ($3.4B), Viet Nam ($2B) and Indonesia ($855M), with a combined 54% share of total imports. China, China, Hong Kong SAR, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Cambodia, Thailand, Japan, South Korea and the United Arab Emirates lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 35%.

Cambodia experienced the highest growth rate of imports, in terms of the main importing countries over the last eleven-year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

In 2018, the cotton fabric import price in Asia amounted to $5,633 per thousand square meters, reducing by -3.6% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the cotton fabric import price continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2011 when the import price increased by 23% y-o-y. The level of import price peaked at $9,532 per thousand square meters in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was China ($8,692 per thousand square meters), while the United Arab Emirates ($3,143 per thousand square meters) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

jersey

EU Jersey Market – Consumption Posted Solid Gains, Reaching $26B

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘EU – Jerseys, Pullovers, Cardigans And Similar Articles – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the jersey market in the European Union amounted to $26.1B in 2018, growing by 9.2% 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, jersey consumption continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2008 when the market value increased by 18% y-o-y. In that year, the jersey market attained its peak level of $28.9B. From 2009 to 2018, the growth of the jersey market remained at a lower figure.

Production in the EU

In 2018, approx. 229M units of jerseys, pullovers, cardigans and similar articles were produced in the European Union; lowering by -3.2% against the previous year. Over the period under review, jersey production continues to indicate a deep curtailment. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2017 with an increase of 10% year-to-year. The volume of jersey production peaked at 398M units in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, production remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, jersey production amounted to $4.3B in 2018 estimated in export prices. In general, jersey production continues to indicate a drastic contraction. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2017 with an increase of 17% y-o-y. Over the period under review, jersey production reached its maximum level at $7.8B in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, production remained at a lower figure.

Exports in the EU

In 2018, approx. 1B units of jerseys, pullovers, cardigans and similar articles were exported in the European Union; picking up by 2.9% against the previous year. The total export volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.8% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded in certain years. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2016 when Exports increased by 23% year-to-year. The volume of exports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, jersey exports totaled $13.3B in 2018. The total export value increased at an average annual rate of +2.0% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being observed over the period under review. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2017 when Exports increased by 15% year-to-year. In that year, jersey exports reached their peak of $13.5B, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Exports by Country

In 2018, Germany (215M units), distantly followed by Belgium (120M units), Italy (119M units), Spain (102M units), France (85M units), the Netherlands (70M units), Poland (68M units) and Denmark (64M units) were the main exporters of jerseys, pullovers, cardigans and similar articles, together generating 81% 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 Poland, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Italy ($3.2B), Germany ($2.7B) and France ($1.4B) appeared to be the countries with the highest levels of exports in 2018, with a combined 55% share of total exports. Belgium, Spain, Poland, Denmark and the Netherlands lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 29%.

Poland experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to exports, among the main exporting countries over the last eleven years, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Export Prices by Country

The jersey export price in the European Union stood at $13 per unit in 2018, lowering by -4.4% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the jersey export price continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2017 when the export price increased by 17% against the previous year. The level of export price peaked at $15 per unit in 2008; however, from 2009 to 2018, export prices failed to regain their momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Italy ($27 per unit), while Spain ($6.9 per unit) was amongst the lowest.

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

Imports in the EU

In 2018, approx. 2.7B units of jerseys, pullovers, cardigans and similar articles were imported in the European Union; growing by 7.3% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.9% over the period from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2008 when Imports increased by 16% year-to-year. The volume of imports peaked in 2018 and are expected to retain its growth in the immediate term.

In value terms, jersey imports stood at $22.6B in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +1.9% from 2007 to 2018; however, the trend pattern remained relatively stable, with somewhat noticeable fluctuations being observed throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2008 when Imports increased by 19% y-o-y. The level of imports peaked in 2018 and are likely to see steady growth in the near future.

Imports by Country

Germany (598M units) and the UK (473M units) represented roughly 40% of total imports of jerseys, pullovers, cardigans and similar articles in 2018. France (305M units) ranks next in terms of the total imports with a 11% share, followed by Italy (9.6%), the Netherlands (6.6%), Spain (4.8%), Belgium (4.6%) and Poland (4.6%).

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

In value terms, Germany ($5B), France ($3.2B) and the UK ($3.2B) constituted the countries with the highest levels of imports in 2018, with a combined 50% share of total imports. Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Belgium and Poland lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 32%.

Among the main importing countries, Poland experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to imports, over the last eleven year period, while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The jersey import price in the European Union stood at $8,501 per thousand units in 2018, coming down by -1.7% against the previous year. Overall, the jersey import price continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2011 an increase of 12% y-o-y. In that year, the import prices for jerseys, pullovers, cardigans and similar articles reached their peak level of $10,568 per thousand units. From 2012 to 2018, the growth in terms of the import prices for jerseys, pullovers, cardigans and similar articles failed to regain its momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was France ($10,555 per thousand units), while the UK ($6,731 per thousand units) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

dangerous goods

Compliance Gaps Revealed in Global Dangerous Goods Confidence Outlook

Dangerous Goods industry players reveal surprising outlooks when it comes down to achieving transport compliance, according to statistics reported in the fourth annual 2019 Global Dangerous Goods Confidence Outlook survey. The results were shared this week during the Dangerous Goods Symposium 2019 event in Chicago and prove that although many are actively a part of the dangerous goods sector, not all are convinced their supply chains are enough to maintain a competitive advantage.

“The growth of ecommerce and the evolution of supply chain has made moving dangerous goods in a safe and compliant manner more important than ever,” said Robert Finn, vice president, Labelmaster. “Unfortunately, several key gaps exist within organizations’ processes and infrastructure that make maintaining a compliant and reliable hazmat supply chain challenging.”

Some of the most telling numbers revealed in the survey point to several factors from infrastructure gaps and leadership risk awareness to technology, budget factors, and communications with supply chain partners. Among the responses, a reported 55 percent confirmed a manual process is still in place for dangerous goods shipping, while a whopping 71 percent expressed the desire for partners matching compliance efforts.

“Companies view DG management and compliance differently, which directly impacts their level of investment and, ultimately, their ability to ensure compliance across their entire organization and adapt to changing operational needs,” Finn said. “As a result, many organizations lack the resources needed to meet their current supply chain needs, and few have the budget and infrastructure necessary to support future requirements.”

Another 42 percent of responses turned attention to the problems in business spurred from the “careless” manner in which some carriers handle dangerous goods while 55 percent struggle with obtaining accurate data from supply chain partners.

Additional results reveal that 67 percent agree their reverse logistics are enough to address current needs with only 20 percent expressing confidence in supporting future dangerous goods operations.

“In order to successfully navigate an increasingly complex and dynamic hazmat supply chain landscape, organizations need to think of compliance beyond simply a mandate and the threat of a fine, and recognize how it can be a competitive advantage that drives revenue, improves supply chain performance, reduces risk and enables better customer service,” Finn concluded.

To read the full report sponsored by Labelmaster, International Air Transport Association (IATA) and Hazardous Cargo Bulletin, please visit: labelmaster.com

menswear

U.S. Menswear Market – Rising Work Clothes Consumption Buoys Current Market Growth

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘U.S. Men’s And Boys’ Cut And Sew Apparel Market. Analysis And Forecast to 2025′. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The revenue of the menswear market in the U.S. amounted to $2.9B in 2018, jumping by 5.6% 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% over the period from 2013 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2018, when the market value increased by 5.6% against the previous year. In that year, the menswear market reached its peak level, and is likely to continue its growth in the immediate term.

Menswear Production in the U.S.

In value terms, menswear production totaled $1.7B in 2018. The total output value increased at an average annual rate of +1.7% from 2013 to 2018; the trend pattern remained consistent, with only minor fluctuations being observed in certain years. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2015, with an increase of 5.3% y-o-y.

Exports from the U.S.

In 2018, menswear exports from the U.S. totaled 39 tonnes, waning by -25.9% against the previous year. Overall, menswear exports continue to indicate a deep contraction. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2016, with an increase of 83% year-to-year. In that year, menswear exports reached their peak of 82 tonnes. From 2017 to 2018, the growth of menswear exports remained at a lower figure. In value terms, menswear exports totaled $416K (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. Over the period under review, menswear exports continue to indicate an abrupt drop. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2016, when exports increased by 110% y-o-y. In that year, menswear exports attained their peak of $1.1M. From 2017 to 2018, the growth of menswear exports failed to regain its momentum.

Exports by Country

Belgium (10 tonnes), New Zealand (5.8 tonnes) and Jamaica (4.3 tonnes) were the main destinations of menswear exports from the U.S., with a combined 52% share of total exports.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of exports, amongst the main countries of destination, was attained by Belgium (+1,931.7% per year), while the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, Jamaica ($122K) emerged as the key foreign market for menswear exports from the U.S., comprising 29% of total menswear exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by New Zealand ($44K), with a 11% share of total exports. It was followed by the UK, with a 9.1% share.

Export Prices by Country

The average menswear export price stood at $11 per kg in 2018, declining by -16.1% against the previous year. In general, the menswear export price continues to indicate a drastic deduction. Export prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest export price was Jamaica ($28 per kg), while the average price for exports to Belgium ($1 per kg) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of export prices was recorded for supplies to New Zealand, while the export prices for the other major destinations experienced more modest paces of growth.

Imports into the U.S.

Menswear imports into the U.S. totaled 70K tonnes in 2018, surging by 9.6% against the previous year. In value terms, menswear imports amounted to $785M (IndexBox estimates) in 2018.

Imports by Country

In 2018, China (30K tonnes) constituted the largest supplier of menswear to the U.S., accounting for a 42% share of total imports. Moreover, menswear imports from China exceeded the figures recorded by the second largest supplier, Honduras (9.4K tonnes), threefold. Viet Nam (9.1K tonnes) ranked third in terms of total imports with a 13% share.

From 2013 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume from China totaled -2.2%. The remaining supplying countries recorded the following average annual rates of imports growth: Honduras (+6.2% per year) and Viet Nam (+9.8% per year).

In value terms, China ($285M) constituted the largest supplier of menswear to the U.S., comprising 36% of total menswear imports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Viet Nam ($136M), with a 17% share of total imports. It was followed by Honduras, with a 9.5% share.

Import Prices by Country

The average menswear import price stood at $11 per kg in 2018, remaining stable against the previous year. Over the period under review, the menswear import price, however, continues to indicate a mild curtailment. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2016, when the average import price increased by 0.4% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the average import prices for men’s and boys’ cut and sew apparel attained their peak figure at $12 per kg in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

There were significant differences in the average import prices amongst the major supplying countries. In 2018, the country with the highest import price was Jordan ($23 per kg), while the price for Pakistan ($5.9 per kg) was amongst the lowest.

From 2013 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of import prices was attained by Cambodia, while the import prices for the other major suppliers experienced a decline.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

grape

Global Dried Grapes Market 2019 – the UK is the Leading Import Market

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

The global dried grapes market revenue amounted to $6B in 2018, going down by -3.5% 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 +3.3% from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2010 when the market value increased by 15% y-o-y. The global dried grapes consumption peaked at $6.7B in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, consumption stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Consumption By Country

China (512K tonnes) constituted the country with the largest volume of dried grapes consumption, comprising approx. 18% of total consumption. Moreover, dried grapes consumption in China exceeded the figures recorded by the world’s second-largest consumer, India (208K tonnes), twofold. The U.S. (160K tonnes) ranked third in terms of total consumption with a 5.6% share.

From 2007 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of volume in China stood at +6.6%. The remaining consuming countries recorded the following average annual rates of consumption growth: India (+8.1% per year) and the U.S. (-5.4% per year).

In value terms, China ($896M), the U.S. ($454M) and India ($444M) were the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2018, with a combined 30% share of the global market.

The countries with the highest levels of dried grapes per capita consumption in 2018 were the UK (1,470 kg per 1000 persons), Germany (831 kg per 1000 persons) and Japan (825 kg per 1000 persons).

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

Market Forecast 2019-2025

Driven by increasing demand for dried grapes worldwide, the market is expected to continue an upward consumption trend over the next seven-year period. Market performance is forecast to retain its current trend pattern, expanding with an anticipated CAGR of +0.1% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to bring the market volume to 3M tonnes by the end of 2025.

Production 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 2.9M tonnes of dried grapes were produced worldwide; lowering by -5.8% against the previous year. Over the period under review, dried grapes production, however, continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2013 when production volume increased by 8.7% y-o-y. The global dried grapes production peaked at 3.2M tonnes in 2016; however, from 2017 to 2018, production remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, dried grapes production stood at $7.1B in 2018 estimated in export prices. The total output value increased at an average annual rate of +3.5% over the period from 2007 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 2013 when production volume increased by 12% against the previous year. The global dried grapes production peaked at $7.3B in 2016; however, from 2017 to 2018, production stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Production By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of dried grapes production in 2018 were China (516K tonnes), Turkey (285K tonnes) and India (230K tonnes), with a combined 36% share of global production.

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

Exports 2007-2018

In 2018, the amount of dried grapes exported worldwide amounted to 773K tonnes, falling by -4.7% against the previous year. Over the period under review, dried grapes exports continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2010 when exports increased by 3.5% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global dried grapes exports attained their maximum at 848K tonnes in 2007; however, from 2008 to 2018, exports failed to regain their momentum.

In value terms, dried grapes exports amounted to $1.7B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total export value increased at an average annual rate of +3.6% from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded over the period under review. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2010 with an increase of 30% year-to-year. Over the period under review, global dried grapes exports reached their peak figure at $2B in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Exports by Country

Turkey represented the key exporter of dried grapes in the world, with the volume of exports reaching 279K tonnes, which was near 36% of total exports in 2018. The U.S. (85K tonnes) occupied the second position in the ranking, followed by Chile (63K tonnes), South Africa (61K tonnes), Uzbekistan (43K tonnes), Iran (42K tonnes) and Argentina (41K tonnes). All these countries together took approx. 43% share of total exports. Afghanistan (26K tonnes), India (23K tonnes), Greece (17K tonnes), China (17K tonnes) and the Netherlands (13K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

Exports from Turkey increased at an average annual rate of +1.4% from 2007 to 2018. At the same time, Afghanistan (+4.7%), South Africa (+3.7%), India (+3.6%), Argentina (+3.3%) and Uzbekistan (+3.1%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, Afghanistan emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +4.7% from 2007-2018. The Netherlands and Chile experienced a relatively flat trend pattern. By contrast, Greece (-2.8%), the U.S. (-3.2%), China (-3.6%) and Iran (-11.4%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. From 2007 to 2018, the share of Turkey, South Africa, Argentina and Uzbekistan increased by +5%, +2.6%, +1.6% and +1.6% percentage points, while the U.S. (-4.7 p.p.) and Iran (-15.2 p.p.) saw their share reduced. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, Turkey ($490M), the U.S. ($284M) and Chile ($156M) were the countries with the highest levels of exports in 2018, with a combined 56% share of global exports. These countries were followed by South Africa, Afghanistan, Argentina, Iran, Uzbekistan, Greece, India, the Netherlands and China, which together accounted for a further 36%.

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

Export Prices by Country

In 2018, the average dried grapes export price amounted to $2,145 per tonne, increasing by 17% against the previous year. In general, the export price indicated a resilient increase from 2007 to 2018: its price increased at an average annual rate of +4.5% over the last eleven-year period. The trend pattern, however, indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2008 an increase of 26% year-to-year. Over the period under review, the average export prices for dried grapes attained their maximum at $2,351 per tonne in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, export prices failed to regain their momentum.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was Afghanistan ($3,794 per tonne), while Uzbekistan ($1,236 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

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

Imports 2007-2018

Global imports stood at 744K tonnes in 2018, declining by -5.9% against the previous year. Overall, dried grapes imports, however, continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2010 with an increase of 8.2% against the previous year. The global imports peaked at 851K tonnes in 2016; however, from 2017 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, dried grapes imports stood at $1.6B (IndexBox estimates) in 2018. The total import value increased at an average annual rate of +3.2% over the period from 2007 to 2018; the trend pattern indicated some noticeable fluctuations being recorded throughout the analyzed period. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2010 with an increase of 27% y-o-y. The global imports peaked at $1.8B in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, imports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Imports by Country

The UK (99K tonnes), Germany (77K tonnes) and the Netherlands (55K tonnes) represented roughly 31% of total imports of dried grapes in 2018. It was distantly followed by Japan (35K tonnes), mixing up a 4.8% share of total imports. Kazakhstan (29K tonnes), France (26K tonnes), Brazil (26K tonnes), Russia (24K tonnes), Canada (24K tonnes), Belgium (22K tonnes), Italy (21K tonnes) and Australia (18K tonnes) followed a long way behind the leaders.

From 2007 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by Kazakhstan, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest dried grapes importing markets worldwide were the UK ($199M), Germany ($163M) and Japan ($116M), together accounting for 31% of global imports. The Netherlands, Canada, France, Brazil, Italy, Russia, Australia, Belgium and Kazakhstan lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 29%.

In terms of the main importing countries, Kazakhstan recorded the highest growth rate of imports, over the last eleven-year period, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The average dried grapes import price stood at $2,094 per tonne in 2018, growing by 15% against the previous year. Over the last eleven-year period, it increased at an average annual rate of +3.1%. The pace of growth was the most pronounced in 2008 when the average import price increased by 23% y-o-y. The global import price peaked at $2,390 per tonne in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, import prices stood at a somewhat lower figure.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Japan ($3,274 per tonne), while Kazakhstan ($592 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

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

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

coconut oil

Global Coconut Oil Market 2019 – the Philippines Continues to Dominate Production and Trade

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘World – Coconut (Copra) Oil – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The global coconut oil market revenue amounted to $5.9B in 2018, going down by -3.7% 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, coconut oil consumption continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2014 when the market value increased by 18% year-to-year. Global coconut oil consumption peaked at $6.1B in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Consumption By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of coconut oil consumption in 2018 were the U.S. (507K tonnes), Indonesia (443K tonnes) and India (385K tonnes), with a combined 38% share of global consumption. The Philippines, Germany, the Netherlands, Viet Nam, China, Malaysia, Mexico and South Korea lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 36%.

From 2011 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut oil consumption, amongst the main consuming countries, was attained by Malaysia, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, India ($1B), the U.S. ($638M) and Indonesia ($545M) constituted the countries with the highest levels of market value in 2018, together accounting for 37% of the global market. These countries were followed by Mexico, the Philippines, Germany, the Netherlands, Viet Nam, Malaysia, China and South Korea, which together accounted for a further 33%.

In 2018, the highest levels of coconut oil per capita consumption was registered in the Netherlands (10,511 kg per 1000 persons), followed by Malaysia (4,269 kg per 1000 persons), the Philippines (2,639 kg per 1000 persons) and Germany (2,237 kg per 1000 persons), while the world average per capita consumption of coconut oil was estimated at 457 kg per 1000 persons.

From 2011 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of the coconut oil per capita consumption in the Netherlands totaled +2.6%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Malaysia (+8.6% per year) and the Philippines (-6.2% per year).

Market Forecast 2019-2025

The coconut oil market is expected to start a downward consumption trend over the next seven years. The performance of the market is forecast to decrease slightly, with an anticipated CAGR of -1.3% for the seven-year period from 2018 to 2025, which is projected to depress the market volume to 3.2M tonnes by the end of 2025.

Production 2007-2018

Global coconut oil production stood at 3.2M tonnes in 2018, remaining constant against the previous year. Overall, coconut oil production continues to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The growth pace was the most rapid in 2017 with an increase of 6.2% y-o-y. Global coconut oil production peaked at 3.3M tonnes in 2012; however, from 2013 to 2018, production stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, coconut oil production stood at $5.2B in 2018 estimated in export prices. Over the period under review, coconut oil production continues to indicate a measured deduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 when production volume increased by 31% y-o-y. Global coconut oil production peaked at $6.1B in 2011; however, from 2012 to 2018, production failed to regain its momentum.

Production By Country

The countries with the highest volumes of coconut oil production in 2018 were the Philippines (1.2M tonnes), Indonesia (885K tonnes) and India (390K tonnes), with a combined 76% share of global production. Viet Nam, Mexico, Malaysia and Cote d’Ivoire lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 12%.

From 2011 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of coconut oil production, amongst the main producing countries, was attained by Cote d’Ivoire, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Exports 2007-2018

In 2018, approx. 1.9M tonnes of coconut (copra) oil were exported worldwide; shrinking by -3.8% against the previous year. Overall, coconut oil exports continue to indicate a slight curtailment. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2012 with an increase of 7.7% y-o-y. Over the period under review, global coconut oil exports attained their peak figure at 2.2M tonnes in 2013; however, from 2014 to 2018, exports stood at a somewhat lower figure.

In value terms, coconut oil exports amounted to $2.6B in 2018. Over the period under review, coconut oil exports continue to indicate a pronounced decrease. The pace of growth appeared the most rapid in 2014 when Exports increased by 31% year-to-year. Global exports peaked at $3.4B in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Exports by Country

In 2018, the Philippines (916K tonnes) was the main exporter of coconut (copra) oil, comprising 49% of total exports. Indonesia (457K tonnes) ranks second in terms of the total exports with a 25% share, followed by the Netherlands (11%) and Malaysia (6.6%).

The Philippines experienced a relatively flat trend pattern of coconut (copra) oil exports. At the same time, the Netherlands (+1.0%) displayed positive paces of growth. Moreover, the Netherlands emerged as the fastest-growing exporter in the world, with a CAGR of +1.0% from 2011-2018. By contrast, Malaysia (-2.3%) and Indonesia (-3.1%) illustrated a downward trend over the same period. The Philippines (+3 p.p.) significantly strengthened its position in terms of the global exports, while Indonesia saw its share reduced by -6.1% from 2011 to 2018, respectively. The shares of the other countries remained relatively stable throughout the analyzed period.

In value terms, the Philippines ($1.2B) remains the largest coconut oil supplier worldwide, comprising 45% of global exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by Indonesia ($570M), with a 22% share of global exports. It was followed by the Netherlands, with a 12% share.

From 2011 to 2018, the average annual rate of growth in terms of value in the Philippines totaled -2.9%. In the other countries, the average annual rates were as follows: Indonesia (-6.9% per year) and the Netherlands (-1.2% per year).

Export Prices by Country

The average coconut oil export price stood at $1,425 per tonne in 2018, reducing by -18.2% against the previous year. Overall, the coconut oil export price continues to indicate a temperate reduction. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 an increase of 34% against the previous year. Over the period under review, the average export prices for coconut (copra) oil reached their peak figure at $1,742 per tonne in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Average prices varied somewhat amongst the major exporting countries. In 2018, major exporting countries recorded the following prices: in the Netherlands ($1,591 per tonne) and Malaysia ($1,319 per tonne), while Indonesia ($1,247 per tonne) and the Philippines ($1,296 per tonne) were amongst the lowest.

From 2011 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by the Netherlands, while the other global leaders experienced a decline in the export price figures.

Imports 2007-2018

In 2018, the global coconut oil imports amounted to 2.1M tonnes, surging by 8.4% against the previous year. The total import volume increased at an average annual rate of +2.6% over the period from 2011 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 2012 with an increase of 23% against the previous year. Global imports peaked at 2.4M tonnes in 2014; however, from 2015 to 2018, imports remained at a lower figure.

In value terms, coconut oil imports amounted to $2.9B in 2018. Over the period under review, coconut oil imports continue to indicate a relatively flat trend pattern. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 with an increase of 40% against the previous year. Global imports peaked at $3.6B in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Imports by Country

The U.S. (528K tonnes) and the Netherlands (378K tonnes) were the key importers of coconut (copra) oil in 2018, amounting to approx. 25% and 18% of total imports, respectively. Germany (198K tonnes) held a 9.3% share (based on tonnes) of total imports, which put it in second place, followed by Malaysia (9.1%) and China (6.7%). The following importers – South Korea (58K tonnes), Spain (55K tonnes), Italy (54K tonnes), Belgium (48K tonnes), Japan (40K tonnes) and Singapore (38K tonnes) – together made up 14% of total imports.

From 2011 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of imports, amongst the main importing countries, was attained by Spain, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, the largest coconut oil importing markets worldwide were the U.S. ($649M), the Netherlands ($464M) and Germany ($277M), together accounting for 49% of global imports.

Among the main importing countries, Germany experienced the highest rates of growth with regard to imports, over the last seven years, while the other global leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

Import Prices by Country

The average coconut oil import price stood at $1,342 per tonne in 2018, going down by -25.9% against the previous year. In general, the coconut oil import price continues to indicate a temperate decrease. The most prominent rate of growth was recorded in 2014 when the average import price increased by 35% y-o-y. Over the period under review, the average import prices for coconut (copra) oil reached their maximum at $1,811 per tonne in 2017, and then declined slightly in the following year.

Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was Belgium ($1,543 per tonne), while Malaysia ($1,028 per tonne) was amongst the lowest.

From 2011 to 2018, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Germany, while the other global leaders experienced a decline in the import price figures.

Source: IndexBox AI Platform

logistics strategy

10 Experts Share Tips on How to Develop a Winning Logistics Strategy

Effective transition of resources cuts production costs, which in turn gives you more maneuvering space to improve other aspects of your business. However, choosing the optimal strategy is demanding, especially for startups. Less experienced business owners can easily fall into a trap and focus their attention on expensive solutions that never show results and live to see their business crumble.

Therefore, we’ve decided to share some of the most constructive pieces of advice from people who mastered logistics strategy development.

Shawn Casemore

Founder and the president of Casemore & Co, Inc. wrote a book on operational management, focusing mainly on sales but most of his ideas are universally applicable. Shawn states that the distribution network holds significant savings potential if properly handled. Leveraging predicted sales volume to negotiate a lower price is one of the key components in logistics. 

Providing long-term cooperation to a courier service often leads to reduced freight costs, meaning more money stays in your pocket. It’s the same as it’s with professional writing services, the more work you need the better terms you get in return. 

Danny Yunes

Coyote Logistics’ Manager of Supply Chain Strategy is a veteran in the industry, with an immense experience that provided him with an important takeaway. Danny Yunes claims that logistics should be calibrated according to the needs of your customers. If your core consumers expect quality service rather than speed because their priority is to receive undamaged goods and according to specifications, your target strategy is clear.

Samuel Levin

SaaS transport management and outsourcing are what MavenWire‘s Managing Director has to say to startups that can’t afford substantial investments in logistics during the first few years. He argues that these options are affordable and easy to keep up with, allowing less experienced managers to stay on top of the process.

Steve Murray

Experienced Chief Researcher at Chain Supply Visions claims that implementation of Sales and Operation planning is the most effective way to build up the performance of each company department to its full potential. This strategy includes cooperation among departments, synchronization of each operational process to reduce loses, avoid penalties, keep data updated, and keeping this harmony in place through constant process auditing and dealing with every issue as a team.

Imagine running an assignment service and your writers sit idle because the orders are not coming through. The whole team should work on finding the solution that will allow seamless workflow and keep the customers happy with the turnaround time. 

Nick Martin

Founder of RiskLogic says that logistics strategy should be resilient. His thoughts are that Just-in-Time strategy seems perfect in the short run but it is fragile because minor setbacks can put your entire operation to a halt. A resilient strategy is one where you are prepared for every eventuality and there’s not much that can disrupt your flow.

Rick Blasgen

Council of Supply Chain Management President and CEO, Rick Blasgen, keeps it simple. His advice is to hire a logistics expert with a proven track record and let that person analyze your options and start working on your strategy. You could start your hunt on LinkedIn and carefully pick top candidates. You could also visit professional conferences for potential hires. Think of it like googling to decide would you hire AssignmentMasters, Assignment Geek, or Grademiners review service to develop marketing content for you.

Clay Gentry

Transportation Insight’s VP of Logistic Operations says that one should develop a strategy according to its impact on your business goals and customers’ operations. His advice is to focus on fulfilling service level goals while implementing the most cost-effective method of resource distribution. Moreover, Clay suggests that outsourcing is sometimes more effective than investing in the development of logistics infrastructure.

Mark Broussard 

CEO of SAMI emphasizes the importance to keep investments in logistics rational, especially in the early days of conducting business. His idea is to be clear that each action you take makes perfect sense for your business at the time that action is taken. Mr. Broussard thinks that every investment and step forward in the development of your strategy needs to support your entire process. 

Kenneth B. Ackerman

Mr. Ackerman devoted his entire professional life to logistics and warehousing management, eventually founding Warehousing Forum, a vault of industry wisdom. His advice is to follow the corporate strategy. Let’s say you decide to start a business and write custom papers for college students and your goal is to provide the fastest service on the internet to take over the market from bestessays.com.au and myassignmenthelp review because they are your main competitors. From the moment you pick up an order to the moment of delivery, the process efficiency depends on flawless logistics. 

Tim Garcia

As it’s to be expected from one of the leaders in the chain management software development industry, Mr. Garcia suggests you should invest in digital solutions to enhance your logistics. His arguments include commonly understaffed supply-chain which makes people work faster and make more mistakes, ability to keep track of each item and financial leverage against a team of experts that would do the same job for much more money.

Conclusion

Enhancing your logistics doesn’t necessarily mean you should pour money into expensive infrastructure or state of the art management software. In most cases, it’s all about organizing that which you already have to serve your purpose the best. However, working with limited resources makes planning and organizing the chain that binds the production somewhat of a challenge. We hope these words of wisdom will help you in achieving your goals.

____________________________________________________________

This guest post is contributed by Kurt Walker who is a blogger and college paper writer. In the course of his studies, he developed an interest in innovative technology and likes to keep business owners informed about the latest technology to use to transform their operations. He writes for companies such as Edu BirdieXpertWriters and uk.bestessays.com on various academic and business topics.

FedEx

FEDEX, UPS, & AMAZON SCRAMBLING IN THE AIR FOR FAST, FREE SHIPPING

Christmas came in May for Amazon Prime subscribers, who were informed the platform’s tens of millions of items would be available for free same-day delivery and two-day shipping. 

“Prime Free One-Day is possible because we’ve been building our network for over 20 years,” reads a company statement. “This allows Amazon to work smarter based on decades of process improvement and innovation, and to deliver orders faster and more efficiently.” 

Customers reap the benefits as Rakuten Intelligence research shows that over the past two years, the time from purchase to delivery has been slashed from 5.2 days to 4.3 days on average. And yet, Amazon is faster still, at 3.2 days.

Other retailers took the Amazon news like a lump of coal, with Walmart scrambling to unveil free one-day shipping without a membership fee. Target already had such a program for card-carrying loyalty shoppers. FedEx revealed it was parting ways with Amazon for “strategic reasons.”

Meanwhile, industry watchers caution about the hidden baggage that comes with rapidly delivered packages.

Competition is Fierce

Despite the cheery one-day news, Amazon still faces competition from Walmart, which boasts more than 4,700 store locations and an extensive network of warehouses from which it can deliver packages. Another worthy contender is XPO Logistics, which is among the largest third-party logistics providers with 90 facilities across the country. 

During his December earnings call, FedEx CEO and founder Fred Smith said his company views Amazon “as a wonderful company and service and they’re a good customer of ours. We don’t see them as a peer competitor at this point in time.” 

Mere months later, FedEx severed ties with Amazon and partnered with Dollar General on package delivery services, with expectations to offer the service in more than 1,500 stores by late in the summer, building to over 8,000 stores by 2020. 

“We believe this move is an attempt to increase delivery density in lower population areas,” states the Morgan Stanley Research on the move. “… The Dollar General partnership follows a series of headlines including FDX’s AMZN customer loss, move to seven-day ground delivery, and incentive compensation modification ahead of their June 25th fourth quarter earnings release.

So much for not seeing Amazon as competition. FedEx’s annual report, which was released on July 16, mentioned Amazon six times and included this context: “We face intense competition.”

“[I]f customers, such as Amazon.com, further develop or expand internal capabilities for the services we provide, it will reduce our revenue and could negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations,” the FedEx report states. “News regarding such developments or expansions could also negatively impact the price of our common stock.”

And how is this for sounding completely opposite to what Smith had said just seven months prior? “[S]ome high volume package shippers, such as Amazon.com, are developing and implementing in-house delivery capabilities and utilizing independent contractors for deliveries, and may be considered competitors.”

Look! Up in the Sky!!

“Amazon.com is investing significant capital to establish a network of hubs, aircraft and vehicles,” the FedEx annual report notes.

That’s striking when you consider the far fewer times FedEx rival UPS is mentioned in the same report. Keep in mind that UPS currently has 564 cargo jets and thousands of facilities and fulfillment centers around the world, while Amazon has one air hub and options on 100 planes—by 2021, according to a June announcement. 

Ditching Amazon as an air customer led to FedEx slashing prices to fill its planes, according to numerous reports.

As the shipping giants fight for the skies, benefits are being reaped on the ground. Hillwood, developer of the 26,000-acre master-planned AllianceTexas development near Fort Worth, announced in June it has acquired control of 600 acres of additional contiguous land. Strategically located between Fort Worth Alliance Airport and the BNSF Railway Alliance Intermodal Facility, the new Alliance Westport property increases Hillwood’s potential for more manufacturing, large-scale logistics facilities and aviation sites adjacent to the airport’s recently expanded runways.

Alliance Westport is already home to more than 8 million square feet of industrial and aviation development, including key logistics facilities for UPS, FedEx and Amazon Air. When combined with BNSF Railway’s intermodal facility volumes, these three hubs will offer Alliance Westport customers unparalleled access to rail, highway and air shipping options, all within a one-mile radius. The railway and roads have direct routes to Mexico and expedited transit times to the West Coast ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

“This is one of the most significant land acquisitions in the history of AllianceTexas,” says Tony Creme, senior vice president of Hillwood. “As Alliance Airport and the BNSF Railway Alliance Intermodal Facility continue to expand and strengthen the foundation for AllianceTexas’ commercial growth, this new property in Alliance Westport will serve as a strategic link between these two pieces of critical logistics infrastructure and offer unparalleled connectivity to our customers.”

 But What About the Planet?

As efforts intensify to move products faster, speedy deliveries are taking a toll on the environment, according to Patrick Browne, director of Global Sustainability at UPS

“The time in transit has a direct relationship to the environmental impact,” Browne told CNN Business on July 15. “I don’t think the average consumer understands the environmental impact of having something tomorrow versus two days from now. The more time you give me, the more efficient I can be.”

A van schlepping goods to e-commerce customer doors does remove from the road the vehicles of those who would otherwise be driving to brick and mortar stores, but a 2012 University of Washington story found that advantage is erased if the delivery route begins far away and items are coming immediately, because the ability to lump orders together is diminished. 

Last-mile services such as Amazon Flex and Walmart’s Spark Delivery often deliver only a few items at once in personal vehicles or small vans. A new option called Amazon Day, which offers discounts and rewards to customers who choose “no-rush shipping,” does allow for the consolidation of orders, however.

Amazon’s competition can take solace in the fact that Amazon was already absorbing added costs for fast deliveries before the Prime one-day announcement, which included news of an additional $800 million investment in logistics infrastructure.