Shipbuilding capacity still decreasing. Many second tier yards are unable to build the modern designs and sizes required. 129 second tier yards that delivered a ship in 2021 *did not receive any new orders in 2021*. These yards will most likely cease to exist in coming years.
Drybulk fleet detail. Orderbook to fleet acutely low in small sizes.
Crude tankers:
Product tankers. By far the lowest orderbook at just 4% of fleet. Compare this to today's earnings of $40k per day and DSF calling for 19% demand growth between 2022 and 2023. Just WOW.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hydrocarbon trades (regardless of clean/dirty) are super fungible over any time period more than the next couple months. If profits in one size get out of whack, the WILL be quickly cannibalized by other ship sizes into a more typical $/ton distribution.
1/ FINALLY some good data on US port calls vs Chinese fleet proportion regarding the proposed Chinese ship fees.
🧵TLDR: Most shipping trades will easily find non-Chinese tonnage to call US ports to avoid the fees
h/t Omar/Jefferies the first reasonable take vs the hysterics
2/ Here are the ratios of non-Chinese fleet to US share of global trade to show how many times over US trade is covered for each segment by the non-Chinese fleet:
3/ Thats not to say there won't be disruption and extra costs. THERE WILL BE. Just not nearly to the hysterical estimates I keep seeing from shipping analysts and the liner company CEOs talking their book and threatening huge reductions in port calls. Not going to happen.
2/ With inventories at bottom of 5 year averages, it seems unlikely that inventories decline meaningfully from here. Just returning to flat inventories adds back the +30 VLCCs of demand. Adding the expected 1mm b/d supply/demand growth in 2025 requires another +30 VLCCs.
3/ Therefore my base case for 2025 sees +60 VLCC equivalents employed vs levels seen since June.
This is vs a fleet of ~900 VLCCS so +7% utilization relative to recent months.
1/ Buried under all of the Middle East and port strike chaos headlines, a very important debate about a carbon tax on shipping is ongoing at IMO meetings this week.
2/ Support for a carbon tax is gathering momentum as it would be one of the most simple, economic, and effective ways to lower carbon emissions in the shipping industry. On the other side of the debate are middle income countries responsible for the lion's share of world trade
3/ These major exporters oppose it because it will increase the cost of traded goods which is partially borne by the producer and partially borne by the consumer.
What few vessels the US has sanctioned due to Russian oil prior to Sovcomflot have been mostly stranded due to the sanctions.
I never trade after hours but felt compelled to today. Picked up a good chunk of $IMPP (had already been buying this dip earlier this week) and $TNK at fair prices. Tried for some $TNP as well but only got a bit.
I count 42x aframax and 15x suezmax in the sovcomflot fleet. If all of these are sidelined, I expect midsize rates to benefit the most which is why I bought the above. $NAT also a good option but already bid up much higher after hours.
1/ Just like with the Russia/Ukraine conflict #tankers are likely to be the #1 beneficiary of renewed enforcement on Iran oil sanctions and associated changing trade patterns 🧵:
2/ The Biden Admin is in a tough spot. If Iran orchestrated the latest conflict in Israel, they will have to respond. How to do this without impacting oil prices? After all, turning a blind eye to existing sanctions has allowed Iran to increase exports by a huge ~500kb/d over the past year keeping a lid on prices.
3/ Just like Russia/Ukraine, the strategic objective of the Biden admin will be to keep the oil flowing but limit the economic benefit gained from it by Russia/Iran as attempted with the price cap. Now that we know that price caps don’t work, what better way to do this than to drive up the cost to ship it?