PORT DEVELOPMENT
tainty over the takeover of Dragados-SPL, the country’s biggest container handler, by JP Morgan. The American investment house has
Dragados question drags on
T
he port industry in Spain is in a kind of collective suspense be- cause of the continuing uncer-
had to postpone its purchase of Dragados- SPL from parent company ACS because it was unable to secure financial backing from banking institutions. Originally, the sale and purchase agreement should have been completed by the end of January. There are concerns about future lev-
els of profitability at Dragados-SPL and worries regarding the refinancing of ex- isting levels of debt. This is despite the fact that the original asking price of €1.5B (WorldCargo News, June 2009, p7) has fallen by one third to €1B. JP Morgan has been seeking around €200M from the banks, mainly to recapitalise Marítima Valenciana (MarVal), the “jewel in the crown” of Dragados-SPL.
The MSC effect
The delay has also doubtless been prompted by pronouncements made by MSC, easily MarVal’s biggest client - last year, MSC turned round 2.3M TEU at Valencia, 65% in transhipment.The ship- ping line has been threatening to quit Valencia unless it receives a better deal for existing transhipment traffic. JP Morgan is also clearly worried
about picking up assets owned by the company in Málaga and Bilbao that have high levels of associated debt, and it has concerns regarding the current portfolio of shareholders at Las Palmas. Not part of the deal is the part of the
business operated by Dragados-SPL over- seas, where assets have been sold to local partners in Brazil, the Dominican Repub- lic, Portugal, Chile, India and China.
Threats
MSC has threatened to shift substantial quantities of transhipment from Valencia unless operating costs during 2010 fall substantially. In total, it is seeking a €10M cost reduction. If this is not forthcoming, it says it will move traffic to Gioia Tauro or Tanger-Med, where it claims prices are more competitive. The line wants to see costs driven
down in a number of areas, including in the provision of tugs, mooring and han- dling, as well as in the rates charged by the port authority for transhipment and port fees. MarVal has been looking at eliminating one of every three stevedores in each work gang in order to justify re- duction in its tariffs. Overtime payments are also under review, as is the way charges are levied for lashing. The outlook is tricky. The Coord-
inadora trade union has presented what it regards as a final offer to the port au- thority (APV) to drive down costs. The plan would reduce MSC’s bill by €3M, far short of the €10M it has demanded. MSC wants €7M cut from the wages
key and the Black Sea from Valencia to the nearby port of Castellón. This is fore- cast to generate traffic this year of 15,000 TEU for Terminal Polivalente de Castellön (TPC). Despite the modest vol- umes involved, the move is significant because MSC wanted to find a cheaper alternative to Valencia on a service gen- erating only around 300 moves/week. MarVal has had to slow down its ex-
pansion programme at Muelle de Costa because of lack of new cargo traffic. Work was deferred for six months, with com- pacting work put off until after the sum- mer. The facility will now enter service in early 2012, which is two years later than
.
WorldCargo
news
scheduled. The area is supposed to be used exclusively by MSC vessels. MarVal is investing €50M in the ex-
pansion area. Work began in September 2008 and was supposed to have taken 16 months to complete. The aim is to pro- vide an operating area of 237,000 m2
Barcelona bid
Grimaldi is to bid for the concession to build and manage a short sea terminal in Barcelona. This will be the first installa- tion of its kind in the port, if the private sector eventually chooses to invest. An initial tender released last year was declared null and void for lack of bids.
Despite national overcapacity in the container handling sector and concerns over profitability, the Port of Cartagena wants to push ahead with its ambitious El Gorguel project. (For last report, see WorldCargo News, December 2009, p1)
Grimaldi declined to bid because it con- sidered that the financial conditions at- tached to the package were “excessive.” The revised tender is more attractive, but it is not known whether Grimaldi will bid alone or with a partner.
have to invest €20M. The concession it- self will be for 15 years, with an option to extend this for another 7.5 years. The terminal will be located on Costa Quay, which is relatively close to the city cen-
The eventual concession holder will
Available from WorldCargo News
“Container Terminal Planning - A Theoretical
bill and €3M from port dues and serv- ices. Some of the labour savings will be achieved when moving containers be- tween terminals and also on lashing du- ties. Coordinadora has said that it would be willing to look at this area again if MSC guaranteed higher traffic levels and if cur- rent legislation allowed it.
Lower throughput
In the past two years, it is estimated, Va- lencia has lost a total of 9 Mt of locally generated traffic because of the global economic downturn. Last year imp/ex traffic amounted to 24.5 Mt, slightly more than transhipment traffic, which tapered off slightly in the second half of last year. In 2007-2009, international tranship-
ment grew by 11 Mt thanks to the open- ing of the MSC Home terminal at the port. Prior to this, local traffic amounted to 70% of the total and transhipment 30%. Today’s throughput of 3.6M TEU is
now split roughly equally between both traffic segments, following an 18% drop last year in imp/ex containers and growth of 15% in transhipment. Hence MSC has obtained even more bargaining power. The line has already moved its weekly service linking Spain with Greece, Tur-
April 2010
Approach”
A major study by Dr Itsuro Watanabe (Container System Technology)
This comprehensive 245 page study is an in-depth analysis of capacity constraints, productivity, selectivity and flexibility of different container handling systems in terminals of different types and sizes: common-users or dedicated; hub centre (transshipment and/or relay) or import/export vocation; gateway or feeder port; intermodal rail or truck distribution inland; with or without CFS, etc. Profusely illustrated with charts, figures and explanatory tables. Effects of different call patterns of containerships and dwell day regimes. Predictive power provided through development of queuing theories. Hundreds of detailed equations.
Price: £165 or US$245 or €245 including postage and packing.
■I enclose my cheque or bank draft for £..................US$................. This must be drawn on a UK bank. ■Please invoice my company - we will mail study on receipt of payment. ■Please debit my American Express
■ Visa ■ Mastercard
■(please indicate card and currency used)
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Expiry date
WCN Publishing: Northbank House, 5 Bridge Street, Leatherhead, Surrey KT22 8BL, UK. Please make payments to: WCN Publishing WCN PUBLISHINGVAT No: 644 2190 53
■ ■ ■ ■
Signature............................................................ Date..................................................
Name........................................... ...........................................................
Title..................................................... ........................................................... Company............................................ ........................................................... ........................................................... Address............................................... ........................................................... ........................................................... ........................................................... ........................................................... Company business .............................. ........................................................... Fax...................................................... Tel.......................................................
19
this form to
+44 1372 370111
Fax
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40