THESTUDYABOUTASTRATEGYOFGLOBALCONTAINER

TERMINALOPERATORS

TakayukiMori
Professor
FacultyofCommerce
UniversityofMarketingandDistribution
Sciences
31,GakuenNishimachi,Nishiku,Kobe
6512188 JAPAN
Email:Takayuki_Mori@red.umds.ac.jp

Abstract:TheoligopolybymergersandacquisitionsorAlliancesprogressesinliner
market.Atthesametime,Industryreorganizationby mergersandacquisitionsandthe
oligopolyaregoingintheworldcontainerterminalindustry.
PurchasedP&OPortby DubaiPortWorld(DPW)andrecentannouncementoftieups
PSAandHutchison,suchactivemovementsprovedabove.Aninvestmenttocontainer
terminals becomes active especially in China. There are two reasons of investing to
container terminals. One is secured terminal for own container vessels by liner
companies.Theotherisbecauseterminalbusinessitselfprofitable.
This study discusses the current situation of container terminal business and the
strategy of the Global Terminal Operators. A background of oligopoly in container
terminalindustry mustbealsodiscussed.
KeyWord:GlobalTerminalOperator,Oligopoly,M&A,Privatization,BOT

1. INTRODUCTION
The oligopoly progresses by mergers and acquisitions as well as alliance instead of
freightconference inthe liner industry.Mergersandacquisitionsarealso active inthe
worldcontainerterminal industry,andan investmenttoacontainerterminalcontinues
inprospectofdemandforcontainertransportation,suddenlyspreadespeciallyinChina.
Thegoalofthisexamine isclarifyingastrategyandafuturetrendofGlobalTerminal
Operatorsandworldterminalindustry.DrewryShippingConsultantscallstheworldor
global scale of terminal operators as Global Terminal Operators on their Annual
Review.Inthispaper,alsouseGlobalTerminalOperator asfollows.
Thepaperproceedsas followsthe first ofthepart presentsthecurrent conditionsof
1

worldterminalindustry.ThesecondpartclassifiedGlobalTerminalOperators.
The third part, it discusses the background of oligopoly by a few Global Terminal
Operators and the business expansion methods. Then I take up the upsizing of a
containership and measurement bya container terminal. Final section is conclusion at
themomentofthestudy.
Here,Ireportprogressinthewayofthisstudysothatthereisthepartwhichastudy
goescontinuouslyandisstillinvestigating.

2. THE PRESENT CONDITONS OF WORLD CONTAINER TERMINAL

INDUSTRY
55%ofworldcontainersarehandledin2004bytoptenterminaloperators.Hutchison
Port Holdings (HPH) handled container 47,800,000TEU in 2004 had the top share of
13.3%.ThensharefollowsAPMollerTerminal(APMT)9.5%,PSA9.3%,DPW9.2%,
and COSCO 3.7%. These big 5 operators share was 41.3% in total. By 22 Global
Terminal Operators, which manage and administrate container terminal world scale,
have65%shareallovertheworld(Table1).
GlobalTerminalOperatorsshareshowshighratioattheterminalsocalledHubPorts,
suchasSingapore,HongKong,Shanghai,Rotterdam,andsoon.
Most of terminals which equip with the super gantry crane suitable for supers post
panamax size containership like 10,000TEU type are administered by a few Global
Terminal Operators. ThesharebyGlobalTerminalOperatorsincreasesbyaninvestment
to new terminals, not only development but also mergers and acquisitions. The
oligopoly progressesbyafewGlobal Terminal Operators.
Global Terminal Operators are positive to invest container terminal expansion,
according to the announced expansion program, container handling capacity will in
creaseby50%until2010bytop5GlobalTerminalOperators.Incaseoftop10Global
TerminalOperators,theincreaseratioisapproximatelysimilar1.5times.
Table1.GlobalContainerTerminalOperators
rank nameoperator
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

throughput(2004)

MillionTEU
HPH
47.8
APMT
34.0
DPWorld
33.3
PSA
33.1
COSCO
13.3
EUROGATE
11.5
EVERGREEN
8.1

Share(%)
13.3%
9.5%
9.3%
9.2%
3.7%
3.2%
2.3%

capacity
(2004)

capacityplan
(2010)

MillionTEU
53.9
43.6
40.8
39.4
15.7
14.0
9.1

MillionTEU
71.9
68.7
59.3
64.6
32.9
19.4
14.1

8 SSAMarine
6.7
1.9%
8.5
9 MSC
5.7
1.6%
7.1
10 HHLA
5.6
1.6%
6.9
11 APL
5.3
1.5%
6.0
12 HANJIN
4.4
1.2%
5.4
13 NYK
4.4
1.2%
6.6
14 OOCL
3.6
1.0%
4.1
15 MOL
3.6
1.0%
3.8
16 DRAGODOS
3.1
0.9%
4.5
17 KLINE
2.6
0.7%
3.3
18 TCB
2.4
0.7%
4.4
19 ICTSI
1.9
0.5%
2.9
20 YANGMING
1.7
0.4%
1.5
21 HYUNDAI
1.2
0.3%
1.1
22 CMACGM
1.2
0.3%
2.1
GlobalOperators
234.5
65.1%
284.7
Total
DPW includingCSXWT&P&OPorts (includingterminalinUSA)
APMTincludingP&ONL
Data:DrewryShippingConsultants

9.9
16.5
9.8
6.7
10.9
6.6
6.7
3.8
7.1
4.1
4.5
4.1
2.4
5.1
5.1
434.2

3. A CLASSIFICATIONOFGLOBALTERMINALOPERATOR
3.1 A Classificationbyparentcompany
Global TerminalOperatorscanbeclassifiedby2categoriesbytheirparentcompanies.
OneistheGlobalTerminalOperatorwhohasportoperationorstevedoringcompanyas
parent,andtheotheriswhoseparentis linershippingcompany. Anoperatoraffiliated
with a liner company is possible to divide by 2 more. The first one is the terminal
operator whosemainpurposeistosupportlinerbusinessascoreofparentcompany.
A GlobalTerminalOperatorofmostaffiliatedwithlinercompanyisabusinessforthe
first classification that is supportof a parent company. There are a lotof cases which
supportofcontainertransportationwhichlimitsthebusinesstoU.S.A.andEastAsiain
an original purpose to support and help container shipping for parent companys core
business.HanjinandHyundai(Korea),YangMing(Taiwan),OOCL(HongKong)and
Kawasaki Kisen(Japan)aretheexamplesofthisclassification. Forthesecompanies,
terminalbusinessisplacedascostcenter.
Thesecondistoofferservicetothirdpartyaswellassupportingparentcorebusiness.
The company of this category manages the terminal business as independent and
evaluatesitprofitcenter. APMTandNYKaregivenforaGlobal TerminalOperator

classified inthesecondobviously.Thesecondcategory mustbeminorityorexception

for the moment. NYK is counted in second category, purchased Ceres Terminal and
expandingterminalbusinessitself.
Table2.ClassificationofGlobalTerminalOperators
Classification CharactaristicsPoints
Owner
Compnaies

Startedwith
Stevedores

Startedwith
Container
Carriers

Primary business is
port operations and
stevedoring
profitcenter

Public(Government PSA,DPW(P&O
orPortAuthority) Ports), HHLA

Private

HPH,Eurogate, SSA
Marine,Dragados,
GrupTCB, ICTSI

Public(Government

Main business is
orPortAuthority)
container
shipping
and investment to
CMACMG,
container terminals is
Evergreen,APL,
supporting this core
Private
Hanjin,Kline,MISC,
activity.costcenter
MOL,YangMing,
Hyundai(HMM)
Parent company is
Public(Government
COSCOPacific
container shipping,
orPortAuthority)
but
establish
terminal
business
independently which
handle third party
Private
APMT,NYK
business as well as
inhousetraffic

Data:byT.Mori
Note: APMT has clear distinction between the terminal operating business and the
parentcompanylinerbusiness

A Global Terminal Operator who placed own business as profit center has
worldwide expanse, but there are own strong presence and not. APMT resists North
America.HPHbeginsHongKongandestablishesthepresencethatisstrongintheFar
East and North Europe and Central America, the Caribbean. PSA presents a terminal
business around Southeast Asia around local Singapore. In addition, P&O Ports was

succeedinDPW whichIputinaffiliationbyhavingbuiltastrongbaseinAustraliaand
SouthernAsiaopeninganetworkindeepSouthernAsiaofaconnectionwiththelocal
MiddleEast.APMTconcentratespoweronMiddleEast,AfricaandCentralandSouth
America not to mention China while further expansion, reinforcement more in North
America.COSCOisestablishingthepresenceinChinaandMSCinNorthEuropeand
MediterraneanSeabytheirownschedule.Acommonpointistobeactiveinaterminal
investmentinChinawhichanticipateddemand,spreadrapidly.In Japan,ICTSIinvested
and joined operation in Naha, Okinawa and PSAparticipated to Hibikinada Container
Terminal,KitaKyushu,butarehardtosaythatissucceeded.
3.2 Aclassificationbymanagementforms
A GlobalTerminalOperatorcanclassifyitbythemanagementformagain.Theseare
owned or administrated by public sector like a government or a port authority, and a
private enterprise. Representatives of an operator administered possession by a
government or a port authority are PSA (Singapore) and DPW (UAE). PSA is the
affiliationininvestmentcompany Temasek,aholdingcompany ownedby theSingapore
Government. DPA(Dubai Port Authority) and DPI(Dubai Port International) together
and started a terminal business by a name of DPWpositively recently. Following the
purchase of 2005 CSXWT, then purchased P&O Ports in 2006 and grew rapidly and
now ranked to Top 3 Global Terminal Operator. HHLA, which Hamburg City owns,
belongstothisclassification.Inthiswaymostofoperatorsstartedfromportoperation
businessareownedby agovernmentoraportauthority.ForaGlobal TerminalOperator
affiliated with a liner company, as well as owned by public sector, Chinese COSCO
Pacificisgiven.
On the other hand, most of operators are belonging to private sector, like HPH,
Eurogate,SSAMarineandICTSIetc.

4.THEPROGRESSOFTHEOLIGOPOLYINTHECONTAINERTERMINAL
INDUSTRY
4.1 Mergersand Acquisitionsstrategy
Accordingtotheaforesaid,worldcontainerhandlingshareisoccupied45%bytop5
GlobalTerminalOperatorsandbytoptenoccupied55%,and65%shareby22Global
Terminal Operators. Above all, HPH, APMT, DPA and PSA, these 4 companies are
especiallyactiveinbusinessexpansion.APMT,DPW,PSAsurpassinthescaleandthe
number of mergers and acquisitions in 2005. In addition, they are aggressive in
investment,anditisanticipatedthatthescalebecomesabout1.5timesasfor4Global
Terminal Operators capacity by 2010. It is anticipated that the oligopoly by Global
TerminalOperatorsprogressesmoreandmore.
5

Mergers and acquisitions become the mainstream as a business expansion strategy.

DPW purchased CSXWT in 2005 and P & O Ports in 2006. DPW rapidly growth as
Global Terminal Operator and is force to enter top 3 now. NYK is going to serve as
expansionofaterminalbusiness,reinforcementbythepurchaseofCeresTerminal,too.
ManymergersandacquisitionswereshownbyAPMTin2005(Table3),butthereare
alsomanymergersandacquisitionsbyAPMTin2004.APMTraisedshareholdingratio
of Suez Canal Container Terminal (Egypt) and Gioia Tauro (Italy), and 40% share
acquiredofDouala(Cameroon)in2004.PositiveinvestmentsbyAPMT continue.

Table3.BusinessExpansionbyGlobalTerminalOperators2005
GlobalOperator
M&A

APMTerminals VridiContainerterminal
acquired40%stocks
Abidjan,IvoryCost
APMTerminals PortofMinaSalman,Bahrain
Acquired admin. & Operation
right,MinaSalmanTerminal
APMTerminals GujaratPipavavTerminal,Yemen acquired47%stocks
APM Terminals Terminal de Conteineres do Vale acquired 50% stocks of
do Itajai S/A (Teconvi), Itajai, TerminalOperatingCompany
SouthernBrazil
APMTerminals Apapa ContainerTerminal, Lagos, Acquired 25 years Terminal
Nigeria
Admin.&Operationright
PSA
HITTerminal,HongKong
20%stockstransferredbyHIT
PSA
COSCOHITTerminalHongKong 10% stocks transferred by
CoscoHIT
PSA
Terminal3,HongKong
Acquired33.3%stocks
PSA
Terminal8Wset,HongKong
Acquired54.2%stocks
DPW
AdenContainerTerminal,Yemen Development & Operating
Contractconcluded
DPW
Rajeev
Gandhi
Container Acquired admin. & Operation
Terminal,Cochin,India
right
DPW
FujairahContainerTerminal,UAE Acquired 30 years Terminal
Admin.&Operationright
DPW
CSXWTTerminalPortfolio
Acquiredmanagementrightof
CSXWorldTerminal
CMA/CGM
ZeebruggeOCHZTerminal
Acquired35%stocks
ICTSI
ToamasinaTerminal,Madagascal Acquired 20 years Terminal
Admin.&Operationright
DataDrewryShippingConsultants
DPWincludingDPAandDPI

Table4.ContainerTerminalsoperatingbyDPWorldPSAHPH

East Asia

Russia
China

DP World(P&O Ports
DP World
Vostocyny
Qingdao
Tianjin *
Shekou
Yantai *
Hong Kong *

Korea
Japan
South East Philippines
Asia
Thialand
Brunei
Singapore
Indonesia
Malaysia
Myanmar
West Asia India

Pakistan
Sri Lanka
Middle East UAE

Oceania

Europe

Saudi Arabia
Australia

Netherlands
Belgium
France

Pusan Newport

Manila
Laem Chabang

Africa

North
America

Rumania
Djibouti
Mozambique
Tanzania
USA

Canada
South
Dominica Rep
America Venezuela
Bahamas
Panama
Mexico

Argentina

Dalian
Tianjin
Fuzhou
Guangzou
Hong Kong

Pusan
Inchon
Kitakyushu
Laem Chabang
Muara
Singapore

Surabaya

Chennai
Nhava Sheva
Mundra
Port Qasim

Hong Kong
Shanghai
Yantian
Xiamen
Zhuhai
Ningbo
Shantou
Pusan
Gwangyang

Laem Chabang

Tanjun Priok
Port Klang
Thilawa
Visakhapatnam
Cochin

Tuticorin

Karachi
Colombo

Brisbane
Sydney
Melbourne
Fremantle

Jebel Ali
Port Rasid
Jeddah
Adelaide *

Damman

Rotterdam
Antwerp
Zeebrugge

Antwerp

Rotterdam

Le Havre
Fos
Marseille

Italy
Portugal
UK

PSA

Genoa
Venice
Sines
Tilbury
Southampton

Felixstowe
Thamesport
Harwick
Constantza
Djibouti

Maputo
Dar es Salaam
New York/New Jersey
Philadelphia
Baltimore
Miami
New Orleans
Vancouver
Puerto Caucedo *
Puerto Cabello *
Free Port
Cristobal
Ensenada
Veracruiz
Manzanillo
Lazano Sardenas
Buenos Aires

Buenos Aires

Data:MitsuiO.S.K.Lines,DrewryShippingConsultant

42 MethodsofContainerTerminal Businessexpansion
According to two examples of mergers and acquisitions by DPW, it is clear that
mergersandacquisitionsarethequickestmeansforbusinessexpansion.However,there
aretheplacesmustdevelopfromnowonbycountriesorgovernments.Itmeansthatit
cannot always use technique to purchase an existing institution. The growth of
containers inChina isremarkableandterminal business mustbeprofitable.According
toContainerlisationInternational,March2006,Shanghairecordedcontainerhandling
volume 1,810 million TEU and Shenzen 1,620 million TEU in 2005. Shanghais
handlingvolumeexpects2,650millionTEUin2007whichwillbemorethanSingapore
andHongKonganditwillbetop.LikeChina,somecountrieshasregulationandjoint
developmentwithagovernmentoraportauthorityareperformed,too.Here,theplace
wherepluralGlobalTerminalOperatorspushforwarddevelopmentjointlyisthoughtto
beagovernmentoraportauthority.Inthiswayvarioustechniquesisusedforbusiness
expansion.EffectivemethodsofterminalexpansionsareprivatizationandBOTaswell
asM&A.
Themethodofexpandingterminalbusinessbyprivatizationistopurchaseaterminal
andtheinstitutionortheadministrationmatterfromagovernmentoraportauthorityat
an opportunity of privatization. In 2004, Malta Freeport was privatized, and
CMACGM which was the greatest user bought it. Management consigns it to P&O
Ports,andtheinstitutionisusedsequentiallyafterwardsinageneraluser.Inanexample
of2005,APMTacquiresNigerianApapaContainerTerminal,theadministrationrightof
Port of Mina Salman of Bahrain. It is a method it does not acquire the assets all in
privatization to attract attention here, and to acquire only the terminal administration
right. There are examples such as the administration right acquisition of 30 years of
FujairahContainerTerminalbyDPWandadministrationrightacquisition for20years
of Toamasina Terminal of Madagascar by ICTSI. In addition, in late years It expects
Turkey as traffic of an increasing container and an Iraq gate way, Turkey expresses
privatizationofIzmir,Mersin,Iskenderun.
The second method is BOT (Build, Operate and Transfer). BOT is the scheme of
utilizing private capital. Construction by private companywith own fund (Built), then
administrate and operate (Operate), finally transfer the constructed facility to
governmentaftercollecting investment(Transfer).ByadoptingaBOT(Built,Operate
andTransfer)scheme,agovernment/aportauthoritycankeeptheproprietaryrightsin
thelongterm andatthesametimeinvitingforeigncapitalandtechnologyispossibleas
well. Such an example is seen in HPH in an expansion program in Laem Chabang
(Thailand)and APMTinAmericanGreenfield.
4.3 Abackgroundof theoligopolyinthecontainerterminalindustry
Atendencyoftheoligopolycontinues.Theoligopolyisprogressingnotonlyterminal
industrybutalsolinershippingandotherindustries,too.
8

TheunificationofglobalmarketafterendofcoldwarbetweentheEastandtheWestis
the progressing background of the oligopoly. The globalization of economy promoted
expansionoffurthertradeandexpansionofamarket.Chinawith 1.3billion populations,
also Russia and India, then in total 3 billion populations entered into a market.
Outsourcing and an off shore ring progressed for a capital saving to lead the market
which spread, and this began circulation to accelerate further globalization. Friction
between nations and a wall go to minimization under global economy. Global
enterprises produce where the cheapest cost and sell at the highest price and R & D
where many excellent manpower live. Logistics supports such a global economy and
global activities. Especially, liner shipping supports international logistics and
distributions. Liner shipping companies expand the service scale and improve the
qualitytomeetneedsofashipper.
Alliance in LinerShipping,themeaning istomaterializethe improvementofservice
quality andscaleexpansionatthesametimewith minimumcost.Butaweakpointof
allianceisthatdecisionmakingtakestimeasmuchasmembersincrease.Becauseofthe
weakpoint,therearelinercompanieschoosingmergersandacquisitionsnotalliance.It
isthereasonthatallianceandmergersandacquisitionsactivateinlinershipping.Sucha
movementhappensinnotonlythelinerindustrybutalsoironandsteel,acar,chemistry
ineveryindustry.Itisnotanexceptioninaterminalbusinesseither.
To win the competition and to rule over a market under global economy, terminal
operatormustextendabusinessscaleandincreaseservicequality.Anenormousamount
isnecessaryforinvestmentandR&D.Theshortestmethodismergersandacquisitions.
The greatest merit gets a necessary thing immediately that is a saving of time of
constructionofaterminalistobepossible.Anexistingcustomerholdstheterminal,and
there does not need to be a thing suffering from oversupply. As a result, it extends a
shareandgetspowertoinfluenceamarket.
Anotherbackgroundofexpansionofinvestmenttoterminal businesscansupportthe
container transportation that continues increasing under global economy. It was a
seriousdelayofacontainershipatLosAngelesandLongBeachinautumn,2004.The
situation that, however, was similar in each European port.The meaning that liner
companies concentrate power on keeping terminal due to secure terminal for own
containership.ThecongestionatLosAngelsand LongBeach in2004wasthetrigger.
Thismeansthatdemandofaterminalcontinuesinfuture,anditistohaveprovedthat
thefutureofaterminalbusinessispromisingtheprofitablebusinesscontinuously.

5.FUTURETRENDOFCONTAINERTERMINALBUSINESS
5.1 Developmentof containershipupsizing
40 years ago, it is 1966 that Sea Land put the containership into overseas
transportation. The first ship was Gateway City, remodeling containership and had
9

loading container capacity with 226 (35 feet container). In 1988, APL launched
4300TEU type containership C10. It is so called overpanamax or postpanamax,
whichsizewasexceededthesizepassingthroughPanamaCanal.AfterC10,asforthe
containership,postpanamaxsizebecamethemainstream,and,afterthis,upsizingofa
containership was accelerated. The containership that 10,000TEU loading is possible
appearssoon. Theloadingcapacityimprovedmorethan20timesgreatlyfor40years.
In2003,alargequantityofcontainershipswereplacedanorderundergoodbusiness
results and favorable condition of ocean freight. Order of a particularly largescale
containership gets a lot of looks. More than 40% of ordered containerships were
8,000TEU size in2003. These largesize containerships are completed successively in
2006.Dockyards until 2008 are approximatelyfullyoccupied, and, as forthe quantity
ofloadingcapacity,increaseofyearlyaverage13%isanticipatedfrom2006to2008.
Table5.ChangingContainershipsizeinEurope/AsiaandTransPacificTradeLanes

Asia/Europe
SeaLand(GatewayCity'57)

TRIOGROUP

TRIOGROUPandOthers
Nedlloyd*Hutchcoverless
CGM/MISC*OverPanamax
Nedlloyd*Hutchcoverless
*OverPanamax
NYK
MOL
Maersk
HYUNDAI
Maersk
P&ONedlloyd

HapagLloyd
OOCL

TransPacific

Year

35'x226

1966
1967
1968

Matson
NYK(HakoneMaru)
MOL(AmericaMaru)

24'x465
752TEU
716TEU

VerazanoBridge
Maersk
APL
APL
USLECONShip
APL*OverPanamax(C10)

2,068TEU
2,1003,000TEU
2,284TEU
2,750TEU
4,148TEU
4,300TEU

1995

OOCL

4,950TEU

1996

COSCO
EMC

5,250TEU
5,364TEU

NYK
MaerskSealand

6,208TEU
6,600TEU*

P&ONedlloyd

6,674TEU

2,1003,000TEU

1971
1973
1980/84
1981
1982
1984/85
3,5003,700TEU 1988
3,568TEU
1991
4,427TEU
199192
4,112TEU
199495
4,800TEU
4,750TEU
6,000TEU
5,550TEU
6,600TEU*
6,674TEU

1997
1998
1999

7,179TEU
8,063TEU

2001
2003

Data:MitsuiO.S.K.Lines,ResearchOffice

10

Figure1.ContainershipsOrdered
Data:MitsuiO.S.K.Lines,ResearchOffice
Note: Percentageisincreasingratiobasedon2003(=6,530,000TEU)

5.2 Measurementof aContainerTerminalwithcontainershipupsizing

Lotsoflargesizecontainerships,morethan8,000TEU,anticipatetolunchafter2006.
Atthesametime,handlingofthecontainercargocontinuouslyincreasesagain.Atthe
mainports,maintenanceandexpansionofacontainerterminalwerehurried.Chinaand
SoutheastAsiancountries,theseareaddingtotherollnotonlytheworld's factorybut
alsoamarket.ThemaintenanceofcontainerterminalsarepushedforwardeveninU.S.
west coast ports which caused big confusion in 2004. There is the thing which it is
assumedthatthereisalimit inU.S.westcoast,andstartedterminal constructionofat
eastcoast.Forexample,Mitsui O.S.K.Linesstartedconstructionofacontainerterminal
inJacksonville.Interminalmaintenance,securityofdepthofthequayas15meters,the
equipment ofagantrycranewith18rowlengthsinordertosupport containershipsof
8,000TEU or 10,000TEUtypeinmainports.
5.3Containersupplyanddemandprospects
According to the aforesaid, the completion of largesize containerships more than
8,000TEUoccurssuccessivelyafter2006.Asaresult,inmainroutesofAsia/European
11

route, North America route, as forthe supply of loading capacity, large increase more
than yearly average 10% is anticipated. Piers, Drewry and some Japanese main liner
companies forecast the demand and supply increase 2 digits for these 3 years. This
meansthatdemandforcontainerterminalsareincreasescontinuouslymoreandmore.
Table6.WorldmainPortsTerminalsDraft&G/Cforover8000TEU containership

2003 Top20 Ports

Port
1
2

Hong Kong
Singapore

3
4

Shanghai
Shenzhen

Busan

Kaosiung

7
8
9
10
11
12

Los Angels
Rotterdam
Hamburg
Antwerp
Dubai
Port Klang

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Long Beach
Qingdao
NY/NJ
Tanjung Pelepas
Tokyo
Bremen/Bremerhaven
Laem Chabang

Others

20 Gioia Tauro
Yokohama
Nagoya
Kobe
Hakata
Kwanyang
Seattle
Oakland
Tacoma
Portland
Vancouver
Norfolk
Charlston

Terminal
HITTerminal9)
Tnajong Pagar
Keppel
Pasir Panjang
WGQ
Yantian(YICT[Phase]
Shekou(SCT[Phase]
Chiwan(CCT[Phase]
PECT
HBCT
GANMANHGCT)
APL(68/69)
HMM(75)
TraPac
ECT Delta Terminal
Burchardkai Terminal
Delwaide Dock Terminal
Jebel Ali
KCT North
KMT West
CUT(HMM)
QQCT
H.HOOK
PhasePhase
TICT
Eurogate Container Terminal

Tips
ESCO
A2
Medcenter
YICT
NCB
KICT

HMM
Terminal5
TraPac
WUT
T6
Delta Port
NIT
Wando

MAX Draft
(m)
22 9
15.5
18
14.6
18
14.6
18 24
15.0
18
14.2
23 18
16.0
20 8
17.0
22 17
16.0
18
15.0
10
SP 3
15.0
SP 4
15.0
18 2 16 4 13 1
14.0
17 3
14.0
18 1 15 4
13.7
23
16.6
SP 3
16.5
16.1
SP 6
14.0
SP
PP
15.0
SP 20
15.0
18 3 16 2
14.6
SP 24
15.0
15 4 13 2 12 1
12.2
22 10 18 14
16.0
18 3 17 3
15.0
PP 7
12
14.5
13 3
14.0
15 1 13 2
14.0
PP 3
14.0
20 4 18 6 17 18
15.5
G/C

PP
20
22
SP
16
17
16
17
18
17
18
18

2
2
5
2
10
5
1
4
2
2

15 1
16 2 13 2
16 2

16 2

18 4

4 PP 4 P 2

15.0
12.0
15.0
14.0
16.0
15.0
12.8
15.5
12.2
15.9
12.5
13.7

Possiblility
G/C Depth

SP=SuperPostPanamax,PP=PostPanamax,P=Panamax
Objects=Top20Ports
MaxDraft15m(atquay)&GantryCraneswith18rowlengthsnecessaryfor8000TEU
containervessel.
Data:MitsuiO.S.K.Lines,ResearchOffice
12

6.CONCLUSION
It is expected that excellent demand of container cargo movements willcontinue in
future.Inaddition,largesizecontainershipsmorethan8,000TEUtypearecompletedin
sequence.Evenifthereisit,asforthesomewaves,itisanticipatedthatanactivestage
continues as forthe container transportation forthe time being by supply and demand
both sides. In other words it means that there are firm needs to container terminals
continuously.
It is a business to be able to anticipate high profit for Global Terminal Operators,
whichever the main purpose is supporting liner business or terminal business itself.
Thenpositive investment is expected. Actually, a profit rateof a container terminal is
high.ProfitratessuchasHPH,PSAorICTSIexceed30%.P&OPorts, Eurogate,alittle
bit less than said companies, and it is 15.5%, 11.3% each (2004). Profit of a terminal
businessofNYKisextremelybad,butratherthiswillbeanexception.Charmacertain
investment ahead for a Global Terminal Operator affiliated with port operation or
stevedoring, there is already now a large quantity of containers or can anticipate
increaseof containersinthenearfuture.InterestingpartisChinawhererapidlyincrease
containers. Other interesting part for investment is future containers anticipated to
increase, but enoughterminal facilities at the present. For example, they are Southern
AsiaorCentralandSouthAmericanports.
Ontheotherhand,GlobalTerminalOperatorsaffiliatedlinershippinghasintensionto
maintainandexpandterminalsthatitisnecessarytoneverhappentowaitmorethanten
daysatoutsideportofLosAngelsorLongBeachwhichhappenedin2004.Therefore,
asfortheterminalbusinessaffiliatedwithashippingcompany,itisimportanttosecure
containerterminalatmaintradelanes,likeU.S.,EuropeandFarEastAsia.
The strategy ofCOSCO as ranked as No.5 has to be paid attention as well as top 4
Global Terminal Operators, HPH, APMT, DPW and PSA. There is a big difference
betweentopgroupandCOSCO.Topgrouphassharemorethan9%each,butCOSCOs
share is 3.7% for the moment. COSCOs participation in planning to a new
terminalcentered in the country in China is a plan to raise the handling ability to 2
times by 2010. China Shipping which a name is not yet over as a Global Terminal
Operator. However, backed by lots of containers from China, China Shipping has
possibilitytojoinGlobalTerminalOperatorsinthenearfuture.MSCisinteresting,too.
MSC became one of the biggest liner companies within very short periods. It has its
container fleet following to Maersk Sealand. For the mean time, MSC expands a
terminal business mainly onNorth Europe and the Mediterranean Sea, butthe pace is
slow in comparison with expanding speed of a container fleet now. But it is worth to
payattentionithowMSCevaluatesandchangesterminal business.
Recently, the construction of container terminal is not easy for land or an
environmental problem in main developed nations such as U.S. or Europe. Rather I
anticipate that an investment goes to new areas of China, Turkey, Central and South
America.
13

Forthetimebeing,HPH,PSA,APMT,andDPW havestrongpresencecontinuously in
theindustry.Itisanticipatedthattheoligopolyprogresses.Itisnotsofarthattheshare
byabove4exceeds50%.Whatyoushouldpayattentiontoisashareofsecondgroup
whicharenexttoabove4companies.
On the other hand, rather slow mutual cooperation becomes important. Antwerp
InternationalTerminal (AIT),whichstartedthecontainerhandlinginDecember,2005is
nominatedforanexample.Aterminalisadministeredjointlyby3companies,Kawasaki
Kisen/Yang Ming/Hanjin (except COSCO of CKYH group) and PSAHNN (PSA
HesseNoord Natie NV is PSA affiliate in Belgium). In this case, PSA can secure
customers and shipping companies can keep influential terminal at Europe main port.
As result, an interest is to have agreed. It is expected a terminal business in future if
with many opportunities when common enterprises of various combinations such as
Global Terminal Operators and Liner companies and a governmentor aport authority
arechosenasastrategy.
Itistheworldwherecooperationcoexistswithcompetition.

REFERENCES
Annual Review of Global Container Terminal Operators 2005 (2005) Drewry
ShippingConsultantsLtd.
ContainerlisationIntenationalRegionalReview,March2006(2006)
JOHO No.1533No153 2006,MitsuiO.S.K.LinesResearchOffice
LinerShipping2004/2005 (2005) MitsuiO.S.K.Lines,Research Office
Masahiko FuruichiA Competition Strategy of Port and Harbor(2005) Institute for
TransportPolicy Studies

14