Where Money in the Maritime Industry Will Come From?

Ships are expensive assets, even small pleasure boat owners know. A small handysize bulker of 32,000 dwt has cost no less than $20 mil as a newbuilding even during weak markets; on the other hand of the spectrum, crude oil supertankers (VLCCs) currently cost appr. $85 mil brand-new, while LNG tankers cost almost twice as much.

Being a successful shipowner, therefore, requires access to capital, as plentiful and as at low cost as possible. Even flamboyantly rich shipowners do not have enough money to own outright their fleets (in most cases), and they have to depend on financial “leverage” and financial partnerships.

Banks traditionally had been providing most of the financing in the maritime industry; throughout business cycles, banks could be depended upon to provide 50-80% leverage, usually in the form of a first preferred ship mortgage – just like a bank would provide a mortgage loan for a residential property, with the asset as collateral. There have been dedicated banks to shipping (typically Scandinavian, British and German due to maritime history) and several more banks were transient in the industry when times were good. And, while easiness of financing varied depending on the phase of the business cycle, it was always available, as long as the shipowner had an impeccable record honoring previous commitments to the banks.

A decade after the Lehman Brothers collapse, banks are heavily regulated (although there is talk of late of loosening banking regulations, at least on one side of the pond), and ship mortgages and asset-backed financing are not the preferred line of business any more. In addition, many banks with shipping exposure are actively still selling shipping loans, trying to cut their exposure to the industry to nil. And, for many shipping banks with big losses from their shipping portfolios, it’s hard to convince senior management and shareholders on the appeal of the shipping industry these days anew; in some corners, shipping and maritime have become dirty words.

Besides small lending on a very selective basis by a handful of small banks for ship mortgages, so small that almost does not matter, traditional lending by the banks is a dead business. There is much more activity in terms of corporate lending to shipowners with big balance sheets and consolidated financials, and with long term and “bankable” charter employment, but there are relatively few such shipowners. The majority of the shipowners are smaller companies, trading their vessels in the spot market, and taking preponderous exposure to the vicissitude of the freight markets.

It has been estimated that shipping banks loan portfolios stood at close to $600 billion at the peak of the market in 2008, which is a very big funding gap to fill.

There has been a plethora of so-called credit funds entering the shipping finance market and aiming at filling the funding gap left behind by the shipping banks. Credit funds has been a new mania on the Wall Street, as such funds try to exploit the inability and inefficiency of the regulated banks to service small and mid-sized companies and companies that cannot “tick all the boxes” of a traditional lender. A recent article in the Financial Times states that between 2010 and now, credit funds based in North America doubled in capacity from app. $75 billion to more than $160 billion, so much so that “shadow banking” started being a concern. Credit funds active in shipping are usually funds dedicated to the industry and not part of multi-industry funds, and often are set up and managed by private equity funds and institutional investors with prior exposure to shipping. Fine print aside, credit funds usually charge at least 7% spread over Libor, with several of them well into double-digit territory. No-one expected credit funds to be as “cheap” as bank loans, but at 700 bps minimum margin, shipowners can barely claim that they have access to effective capital. After the honeymoon period of the first entrants to the market, credit funds cannot be the dependable source of capital the shipping industry requires, it seems.

Looking into equity, in the last decade, when the freight market was the best in a lifetime and equity markets were buoyant, there were several attempts of Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) by several shipping companies. Their track-record aside, public equity markets at present are looking for only large (billion-plus balance sheet, etc) and well established shipping companies with a “story”, hopefully a story of growth; for many of the smaller shipowners, the public equity (and debt) markets cannot be considered a source of capital, another dead-end for shipping financing.

Chinese leasing recently has been in the news as many Chinese lessors are looking into expanding aggressively in the international shipping market, and they have been active with sale-and-leaseback transactions. Although more bureaucratic than western financing, their overall terms are rather lenient – but again, for shipowners with sizeable fleets and consolidated financials.

Many industry experts have been contemplating what the source of capital will be for shipping. It’s really a very critical question to answer, and we think, it will affect the nature of the shipping industry in the years to come. Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co even held a shipping finance conference in Athens in early 2018 focused on just such question, and a follow up conference is already in the works for January 2019. Because of shipping finance (and also new regulations, etc), we believe that the shipping industry is at an inflection point where drastic changes are about to take place. Likely shipping in the next decade and the decades to come will be of a different nature, and that’s mainly because the nature of the shipping finance is a-changing. A great deal of shipowners will be materially affected by it, unless they start being pro-active right away.


© 2013 – present Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.  All Rights Reserved.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  Access to this blog signifies the reader’s irrevocable acceptance of this disclaimer. No part of this blog can be reproduced by any means and under any circumstances, whatsoever, in whole or in part, without proper attribution or the consent of the copyright and trademark holders of this website. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that information here within has been received from sources believed to be reliable and such information is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing, no warranties or assurances whatsoever are made in reference to accuracy or completeness of said information, and no liability whatsoever will be accepted for taking or failing to take any action upon any information contained in any part of this website.  Thank you for the consideration.

 

Advertisements

Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co. to Host Shipping Finance Conference in Athens, Greece

Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co Proudly Hosts the Shipping Finance Conference 2018 in Athens, Greece, on February 22nd,  in co-operation with Slide2Open and Boussias Communications.

Please join a group of high caliber speakers and thought leaders in the maritime industry discussing the current state of the shipping industry, the challenges and opportunities looking forward, in presentations, panel discussions and Q&A sessions in modules ranging from shipping finance and investment opportunities to disruptive technologies and e-commerce in shipping and related industries. This will the first conference in this agenda-setting must-attend series of events on shipping and shipping finance to  be hosted by Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co and their business associates.

We are looking forward seeing you in Athens on February 22nd, 2018!


© 2013 – present Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.  All Rights Reserved.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  Access to this blog signifies the reader’s irrevocable acceptance of this disclaimer. No part of this blog can be reproduced by any means and under any circumstances, whatsoever, in whole or in part, without proper attribution or the consent of the copyright and trademark holders of this website. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that information here within has been received from sources believed to be reliable and such information is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing, no warranties or assurances whatsoever are made in reference to accuracy or completeness of said information, and no liability whatsoever will be accepted for taking or failing to take any action upon any information contained in any part of this website.  Thank you for the consideration.

Topical Insight and Current Developments in the Maritime Industry

Basil M Karatzas and Karatzas Marine Advisors Quoted in the News

We are delighted that Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co. and its founder Basil M. Karatzas have been the trusted and insightful source of market knowledge and intelligence for all things maritime; with prompt and accurate access to market information, a vast network of resources and paramount access to senior executives worldwide, in the shipping and complimentary industries, the company and its founding partner have had a front row seat to today’s developments in the maritime industry.

We always thought that we have had a strong advantage over the competition and nothing gives us higher pleasure than seeing our expertise appreciated beyond a constant deal-flow and boardroom discussions with our clients, and in the pages and the trust of the international business press.

Recent media quotations for Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors:

Need help to buy a ship or jet? Credit Suisse looks to lure super-rich            (Reuters, November 6th, 2017)
This Reuters article explores Credit Suisse’s unique approach to shipping whereby only the top and wealthiest names in shipping that are worth of the bank’s prestigious private wealth management service can still obtain loans for commercial ships or a yacht or a jet… Smaller shipping clients of the bank, whether performing or not with their loans, are “encouraged” to take their business elsewhere.

Investment opportunities in shipping could perhaps be the best in over 30 years’ (Splash 24/7, October 17th, 2017)
“The prospects for dry-bulk have not looked so promising in some time now,” Basil Karatzas, a Splash columnist, said. However, Basil Karatzas qualified the statement by adding that “Hopefully the improved prospects for the market will not be another excuse to kill the market in the bud.”

How protectionism sank America’s entire merchant fleet                                            (The Economist, October 5th, 2017)
This year’s hurricane season and Puerto Rico’s predicament brought to the surface the politics and economics of the Jones Act market. Without necessarily taking a position on the matter, Basil Karatzas is quoted in the ever insightful and prestigious The Economist.

Shipping may gain from Mexico grain pain                                                                    (Lloyd’s List, September 22nd, 2017)
Anti-globalization talk is not always bad for shipping; counter-intuitive, but true. Just look at Mexico’s grain imports.

Shipowners Rejoice Over Rising Demand for Commodities                                      (The Wall Street Journal, September 22nd, 2017)
2017 has been good for the dry-bulk shipping industry. Not an exceptional year and actually the threshold was too low given the abysmal market in 2016. However, on the strength of commodities trading and importation, dry-bulk vessels, especially capesize vessels, have seen the market to quintuple.

Global Shipping Trends: China Cosco Buys Orient Overseas                                      (The Diplomat, August 16th, 2017).
An interview with Dr Mercy A Kuo and the esteemed publication The Diplomat, an international affairs magazine for the Asia Pacific.

China underlines shipping ambitions with $6.3bn takeover of HK group                (Financial Times, July 9th, 2017)
Commenting in the Financial Times on state-owned Cosco acquisition of Orient Overseas International (OOIL) in Hong Kong

China’s Cosco to Buy Shipping Rival Orient Overseas for $6.3 Billion                        (The Wall Street Journal, July 9th, 2017)
Commenting in The Wall Street Journal on state-owned Cosco acquisition of Orient Overseas International (OOIL) in Hong Kong

Trying to see through the fog…even from the shore, the sea can look overwhelming… but always a charmer and a generous giver to those who dare… Cape Cod, MA, USA Image credit: Karatzas Images

© 2013 – present Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.  All Rights Reserved.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  Access to this blog signifies the reader’s irrevocable acceptance of this disclaimer. No part of this blog can be reproduced by any means and under any circumstances, whatsoever, in whole or in part, without proper attribution or the consent of the copyright and trademark holders of this website. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that information here within has been received from sources believed to be reliable and such information is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing, no warranties or assurances whatsoever are made in reference to accuracy or completeness of said information, and no liability whatsoever will be accepted for taking or failing to take any action upon any information contained in any part of this website.  Thank you for the consideration.

Looking at Shipping’s Crystal Ball for 2017

We are pleased to reproduce an article that Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co. was invited to contribute for BMTI’s annual review earlier this year. BMTI is an independent research firm which produces daily and bespoke reports in the dry bulk market with special emphasis for smaller tonnage, MPPs, and other specialty assets. Their website can be accessed by clicking here, please pay them a visit! To read our article, please click on the icon herebelow.

pages-from-pages-from-b-2017jan-02-bmti-report-2

© 2013 – present Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.  All Rights Reserved.


IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  Access to this blog signifies the reader’s irrevocable acceptance of this disclaimer. No part of this blog can be reproduced by any means and under any circumstances, whatsoever, in whole or in part, without proper attribution or the consent of the copyright and trademark holders of this website. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that information here within has been received from sources believed to be reliable and such information is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing, no warranties or assurances whatsoever are made in reference to accuracy or completeness of said information, and no liability whatsoever will be accepted for taking or failing to take any action upon any information contained in any part of this website.  Thank you for the consideration.

pages-from-b-2017jan-02-bmti-report

When Ship Scrapping is an Industry’s Best Hope of a Favorable Wind

Holy Scrap!

When one wants to express strong astonishment, ‘Holy mackerel!’ is a nautical expression that does the trick well. We heard this expression (in British English, that is) many many years ago by a Brit who had beached on the Louisiana coastline in the US Gulf a few decades earlier.

There are a couple of theories for the origin of the expression, but the most plausible holds that since mackerel is a fish that goes bad very fast, fishermen in old England were given extraordinary permission by the church to sell their mackerel catch on Sundays. ‘Guests and fish stink in three days’, the wise Benjamin Franklin astutely once observed, but mackerel is worse than that. And if the church is willing to grant permission to do business on the Lord’s day, there has to be a sacred excuse, and thus the expression.

The expression came to mind while reading a market commentary on the fact that the just passed IMO regulation demanding 0.5% sulphur content in bunker fuel by 2020 will lead to a scrapping wave strong enough to bring a much wanted tonnage balance in the shipping market. In a lousy shipping market, this was a ‘Holy mackerel!’ moment, the way we saw it.

Or, ‘Holy scrap!’ to be more precise; nothing could be more sacrosanct than scrapping in the present market!

The IMO regulation has the potential to be a costly catalyst for the shipping industry, by as much as $40 billion by some estimates. For an industry in distress, additional costs and mandatory investments are the last news one wants to hear about. Complying with the new resolution, a shipowner would have to retrofit a vessel to burn high quality marine diesel fuel low in sulphur, install scrubbers to arrest pollutants and lower emissions or, thirdly, convert the vessel to be powered by natural gas or another low emissions fuel; all pricey solutions that will cost a couple of million of investment per vessel, a tough proposition for a shipowner in a weak market.

Scrapping however is a long shot as an alternative course of action.

Deciding to sell a vessel for scrap is one of the hardest decisions a shipowner has to make, and literally, this is the last decision they will make after exhausting every possible scenario. Selling a vessel for scrap is a terminal and irrevocable decision and quite often entails taking losses in today’s market. Even if there is a ray of hope and an alternative, the shipowner will decide to hold off selling the vessel for scrap. Old age, obsolete design, tonnage oversupply, new regulations, etc are not always definite reasons for scrapping.

With OPA 90, following the grounding of the infamous tanker ‘Exxon Valdez’, single hull tankers were given an expiration date for January 1st, 2015 to be totally removed from the trade. A long lead-time indeed for shipowners to plan for that resolution. What effectively happened was that although there were no single-hulled tanker newbuilding orders since the late 90’s and publicly listed and politically correct shipowners divested off of their single hull tonnage soon thereafter, almost 14% of the world’s tanker fleet was still single-hulled in January 2010, twenty whole years after the new regulation came into place and five years before the final ‘drop dead’ date. Regulations or not, shipowners, worldwide and collectively, effectively kept ‘obsolete’ ships in the market much longer than anybody would had anticipated.

2016-10oct29-holy-scrap-article_graph

Scrapping activity is an inverse relationship of the freight market. Credit: Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.

The first decade of our century experienced once-in-a-lifetime freight market on the back of China’s expansive growth and easy credit by lenders, which partially explains how single-hulled tankers were kept afloat for so long. Actually, all being equal, the strength of the freight market is a best predictor of the level of scrapping and tonnage withdrawals from the shipping market. As long as freight rates are cash flow positive, ships are not getting scrapped; when the freight market is cash flow negative and prospects for a recovery are poor, then demolition levels pick up. The following graph of the Baltic Dry Index (BDI), the proxy for the dry bulk shipping market, clearly shows the inverse relationship between the index and scrapping activity. There seem to be a two-three month lag, but each time the BDI drastically moves, the scrap yards in Alang, Gadani and Chittagong get to hear about it, one way or another. Earlier in 2016, when the BDI was flirting with all time lows, demolition activity had spiked through the roof, approaching 10% of the world fleet. A few months later with the freight market barely above break even for the dry bulk market, scrapping has more than halved, to the disappointment of analysts and investors who were drawing straight line annual projections based on the activity of the first few months of the year. Scrapping is high still today, to be sure, and comes from many sectors, including containerships, but the moral of the story is that scrapping does not seem to be the convenient and sacrosanct solution that always seem to be.

There is a third case of disappointment in scrapping: after the shipping market collapsed in 2008, still cash rich shipowners and institutional investors were aiming at buying dirty cheap ships from shipping banks. When the banks held back from selling at any price, at least then, many a shipowner and especially an institutional investor jumped on the wagon of ‘eco-ships’ being fuel efficient that would make ships held by the banks obsolete. And, a massive wave of newbuilding orders was placed. Fast forward five years later, and we all now know that the fresh deliveries of better eco-ships failed miserably to force older tonnage to the scrap heap. Brand new ships, and modern ships, and older ship, and old ships have kept floating and trading and depressing the freight market for all. The wave of demolitions triggered by the eco-design deliveries crowding out older tonnage, shown in Power-point presentations to Wall Street, has failed to materialize and save the market. Holy scrap was not!

We do not want to discount the importance of scrapping to achieving a balanced market. Actually, at this stage of the cycle, scrapping seems one of the most promising drivers for the market; shipping is so bad, indeed. And the new regulations by the IMO for lower emissions will push some shipowners to the edge, and some ships to the beach. However, likely, in our opinion, scrapping will be a slow remedy that will be more drastic with the level of the pain of the market, that is the state of the BDI and the rest of the freight market.

As they say, pain is beauty!

Holy scrap!

reflection-on-water_propellerrudder_red_piraeus_kpm_jul2015-3

Never easy to say ‘Good bye’ in shipping. Image credit: Karatzas Images


This article was originally was posted on Splash 24/7 under the title ‘Holy Scrap’ on November 1st, 2016.


© 2013 – present Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.  All Rights Reserved.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  Access to this blog signifies the reader’s irrevocable acceptance of this disclaimer. No part of this blog can be reproduced by any means and under any circumstances, whatsoever, in whole or in part, without proper attribution or the consent of the copyright and trademark holders of this website. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that information here within has been received from sources believed to be reliable and such information is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing, no warranties or assurances whatsoever are made in reference to accuracy or completeness of said information, and no liability whatsoever will be accepted for taking or failing to take any action upon any information contained in any part of this website.  Thank you for the consideration.

Karatzas Marine Presentation at 1st MareForum Shipping Conference, Panama City

Conference host and Market Research MareForum has hosted their 1st MareForum Shipping Conference in Panama City on June 24th, 2016, just two days before the official inauguration of the expanded Panama Canal. Basil M Karatzas has been honored to participate and present at the MareForum conference on shipping finance and the investment opportunities present in the industry, titled ‘An Anemic State of Shipping, A Plethora of Opportunities’. The presentation can  be accessed by clicking on the image of the Bridge of the Americas herebelow. Images from strolling Panama City and from the celebrations of the Panama Canal opening celebrations.

Panama Puente de las Americas BMK_0479 @

Bridge of the Americas (Puente de las Americas) straddling the Panama Canal by Balboa and the entrance to the Pacific Ocean. Image credit: Karatzas Images.

Varela_Panama_The Great Connection JUN2016

His Excellency, The President of the Republic of Panama Mr Juan Carlos Varela Rodríguez at the Presentation Oficial del Canal Ampliado (ATLAPA). Image credit: Karatzas Images

Karatzas & Varela Rodriguez IMG_4537

His Excellency, The President of the Republic of Panama Mr Juan Carlos Varela Rodríguez with Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co CEO, Mr Basil M Karatzas. Image credit: Karatzas Images.

© 2013 – present Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.  All Rights Reserved.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  Access to this blog signifies the reader’s irrevocable acceptance of this disclaimer. No part of this blog can be reproduced by any means and under any circumstances, whatsoever, in whole or in part, without proper attribution or the consent of the copyright and trademark holders of this website. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that information here within has been received from sources believed to be reliable and such information is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing, no warranties or assurances whatsoever are made in reference to accuracy or completeness of said information, and no liability whatsoever will be accepted for taking or failing to take any action upon any information contained in any part of this website.  Thank you for the consideration.

Presentation_1st Panama MAREFORUM_Karatzas F JUN2016

Save

Save

Save

Save

The abysmally low dry bulk market has a silver lining

Following article was originally posted on the Maritime Executive website under the heading ‘Silver Linings in a Cloudy Shipping Landscape’.


The precipitous decline of the Baltic Dry Index (BDI) and the multiple readings of all-time lows earlier this year have brought the state of the abysmally low freight market to the front pages of the international business press. Effectively, earlier in 2016, all dry bulk vessels afloat, irrespective of age, size and trade, were making $3,000 pd, if and when they could manage to find a cargo. $3,000 pd is below operating breakeven for all types of dry bulk vessels, well before taking into consideration the financial cost and drydocking provisions. For any business covering only variable cost, the future cannot be too effulgent.

While indeed low freight rates will prove too painful for many shipowners owners and shipping lenders, regrettably, we are of the opinion that the miserable state of the market is actually its greatest hope as well. Indeed.

The market collapse in 2008 was too fast and condensed to leave any survival agony; and, coming after the good years of the super-boom cycle with many owners were still in a very very good mood and with piles of cash in the bank, the impact and the lessons the collapse in 2008 were fast ignored. Shipowners and institutional investors alike, failing at sourcing cheap ships from the banks, went to the shipyards and ordered massive numbers of vessels in almost every segment. While the world fleet was fairly young in 2010 (slightly over ten years of age, on average), buyers of new orders were aiming at building fleets with a lower cost basis (lower shipbuilding prices than boom years, often also subsidized with export credit) and better fuel consumption (think ‘eco design’). As a result, at the end of 2013, the outstanding dry bulk orderbook ballooned to 22% of the world fleet, with certain asset classes (35,000+ dwt handies, 80,000 dwt panamaxes and Newcastlemax / capes topping 50% of the outstanding orderbook of same asset class). Given the required couple of years lead-time for the delivery of a vessel, the present implosion of the BDI is partially the result of the newbuilding wave in 2012-2014. However, in the present crisis, new orders for dry bulk vessels placed in 2015 dropped to appr. 18 mil deadweight from apprx. 67 mil in 2014, an almost a 75% decline. We see this as a silver lining in the world of the dry bulk market.

Covering only variable cost entails hard management and trading decisions, and none is costlier than dry-docking a vessel and having soon to see them on a beaching yard. The low dry freight environment saw a largely expanded demolition schedule in 2015, with close to 31 mil deadweight tons scrapped vs appr. 16 mil scrapped in 2014, an almost doubling of demolitions, courtesy of the continuously weak freight market. Checking the flip side of the coin, appr. 49 mil deadweight was delivered in 2015 vs. appr. 48 mil deliveries in 2014, a miniscule increase; again, courtesy of the weak freight market, cancellations, slippage and other market retardants.   Taking a combined look for deliveries and scrapping, in 2015 actually the rate of increase of the world dry bulk fleet decreased actually in 2015, an always encouraging sign when supply declines. Just another silver line in a cloudy sky.

Taking a longer look on the tonnage supply picture, there has been a shipyard consolidation in China in the last year, with many yards, admittedly many greenfield yards, going out of business. Accurate data out of China are always precious to find, but we estimate that the dry bulk shipbuilding capacity in China has shrunk by a third in 2015; there is always the danger that these simplistic shipbuilders can easily come back to the market, but we are encouraged in the silver lining of decreasing shipbuilding capacity.

A great deal of the outstanding orderbook has been fueled by China’s credit boom of the last years, including subsidies and export credit for newbuildings orders placed in China. Again, news about China has to be taken with a grain of salt, but it seems that easy credit and/or export credit will not be available any time soon for those ordering more newbuilding vessels; besides, it’s difficult to extend credit in a cash flow negative market. Just another welcome silver lining on the horizon!

The collapse of the market in 2008 attracted for the first time many institutional investors to shipping, who invested in second hand vessels, shipping equities and bonds, but mostly ordered vessels for all their heart could content. Opportunistic money bear partially the blame for the present state of the market, but such blame has been very expensive too: in general, most investments by institutional investors in shipping are under water at present, figuratively speaking; it’s hard to quantify the losses for the overall market, but for publicly listed companies, calculations can me made with certain degree of accuracy: Lloyd’s List recently published that Scorpio Bulk, backed by institutional investors, realized a $400 mil loss from the ordering and disposal of 28 capesize vessels, an approximate 30% value destruction on the original investment. Anecdotal evidence suggests that 30% is the present losses across the industry, realized or not by institutional investors in shipping. Based on the estimate that $30 billion were invested in shipping post-2008, $10 billion are now in the bottom of the ocean. One can be sure that after such losses, no many institutional investors want to hear about newbuildings, which in our opinion is the silver-est of linings in this bad market: keeping opportunistic investors away from expanding market capacity.

The present cycle is really painful and it’s unavoidable that many shipowners will file for projection or bankruptcy; many investors and lenders stand to realize more losses in shipping in the coming year. It’s a pity, really, but that’s life. We are of the opinion that a protracted and extremely bad market is actually a good thing for the market in the long term; owners will default, banks will get aggressive with owners, ships will be forced to be scrapped sooner or later, and hopefully sooner than later, investments will start taking place on fundamentals and not on gut feelings and investment themes (‘eco design’ has to be one for the ages). Fewer people will be around in shipping when the bloodbath is over, but they will be bigger, better capitalized, better organized and managed, and better positioned for a changing future.

We want to view the present pain in the market as growing pains that needed to make one strong. BDI is bad, but no despair is needed. There is good to come out of this ugly mess.

Hamburg_Cranes Panoramic_Silver Lining_BMK_9721_FEB2016 @

Actually, there is a silver lining despite the lack of ships at the dock… Image Credit: Karatzas Maritime Images


© 2013 – present Basil M Karatzas & Karatzas Marine Advisors & Co.  All Rights Reserved.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:  Access to this blog signifies the reader’s irrevocable acceptance of this disclaimer. No part of this blog can be reproduced by any means and under any circumstances, whatsoever, in whole or in part, without proper attribution or the consent of the copyright and trademark holders of this website. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that information here within has been received from sources believed to be reliable and such information is believed to be accurate at the time of publishing, no warranties or assurances whatsoever are made in reference to accuracy or completeness of said information, and no liability whatsoever will be accepted for taking or failing to take any action upon any information contained in any part of this website.  Thank you for the consideration.