Konteyner Gemilerinin Yatırım Analizi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada; 600 TEU taşıma kapasiteli bir konteyner gemisinin tek sefer ve tüm ömür boyu yatırım karlılığı problemi incelenmiştir. Çözüm sonucunda varılmak istenen hedefler başlangıçta şu şekilde saptanmıştır:. Söz konusu geminin hangi işletme koşullarında (hat, navlun, doluluk oram vs.) tek sefer için ekonomik olarak en yüksek karlılığı sağlayacağını bulmak,. Söz konusu geminin hangi işletme koşullarında (hat, navlun, doluluk oranı vs.) tüm ömür boyu için ekonomik olarak en yüksek karlılığı sağlayacağını bulmak ve bu yatırımın bilinen yatırım değerlendirme ölçütleri ışığında ekonomik olarak anlamlı olup olmadığına karar vermek, Problemin çözümü iki kademelidir: Uygun senaryolar altında, öncelikle bir sefer benzetim modeli oluşturarak sefer nakit akışı analizi gerçekleştirmek, ardından da geminin ömür boyu maliyet ve kazançlarını esas alan bir ekonomik model kullanarak yıllık nakit akışı analizine geçmek. Modellerde; Amerika Hattı, Kontinant Hattı ve Uzakdoğu Hattı birer işletme senaryosu olarak ele alınmıştır. Bu modeller "Excel" hesap tablosu programı ile oluşturulmuştur. Problemin 1.kademesinin çözümünden aşağıdaki sonuçlar bulunmuştur:. Amerika Hattı, Kontinant Hattı ve Uzakdoğu Hattı'ndaki navlunlar, hesaplanan başabaş navlunlarından (RFR) yüksek çıkmıştır. Dolayısıyla karar verme açısından düşünüldüğünde böyle bir seferi herhangi bir senaryo altında gerçekleştirmek, gemiyi bu seferden alıkoymaktan daha iyidir. Ancak çok daha iyi bir karar için, geminin işletileceği en karlı hattı tayin etmek gerekmektedir. Bunun için, her hattın birim mesafe başına net sefer karları karşılaştırılmıştır. En karlı hat olarak tayin edilen Uzakdoğu Hattı'nda gemiyi işletmek çok daha akılcı bir karar olacaktır. Problemin 2.kademesinin çözümünden aşağıdaki sonuçlar bulunmuştur:. Senaryo analizi sonuçlarına göre geminin bugünkü net değeri yaklaşık $16.600.000 olarak elde edilmiştir. Yine bu sonuçlara göre gemi sahibi, başlangıçta hedeflediği %12'lik eşdeğer faiz oranını yaklaşık %63,7'lik bir geri dönüş oram ile fazlasıyla aşmıştır. Doğru karar bu yatırımı yapmaktır. Ancak daha iyi bir karar, yatırımı, gemiyi Uzakdoğu Hattı'nda mevcut navlun ve doluluk oranları ile işletmek suretiyle yapmaktır. Gemi sahibi yatırımını; Amerika Hattı senaryosuna göre 8.yılın başlarında, Kontinant Hattı senaryosuna göre, 8. yılın sonlarına doğru, Uzakdoğu Hattı senaryosuna göre, 7.yılın hemen başlarında amorti etmektedir.

The designer, the builder and the operator are each faced with selecting the "best" design for the required purpose. "Efficient" vessels are required, but efficiency can be measured in many ways, whether physical, in terms of power output/fuel energy input or economic, in terms of profit /capital invested. It is desirable to express as many of the components of operation and efficiency in economic terms as possible, e.g. propulsion efficiency converted into cost, crew requirements into manning costs. Estimates of, say, reliability can in principle be converted into cost (e.g. breakdown leading to repair cost and loss of income). For commercial vessels, earning ability can be estimated, but for pure service vessels or military vessels, such measures are not appropriate. Then some form of cost-benefit analysis is needed, or a multiple criteria decision making analysis to weigh up the performance and cost attributes are deemed most appropriate. Economic evaluations can be used to assist the comparison of alternatives candidate designs (analysis or selection) as well as the more difficult problem of establishing the design parameters of the most efficient vessel (synthesis or optimization). In both cases, the operating environment, physical and economic, needs to be specified by the decision maker, even if its detailed description is held on some database, e.g. area of operation and frequency of sea states, or cargo availability and freight rate patterns. In either situation, the best, or most effective design will change with the decision maker's choice of, for example, route structure and terminal location, or of fuel price scenario. In order to make an economic evaluation, it is necessary to select an economic analysis method, an economic measure of merit and an appropriate operating model. In view of the above comments on timing and markets, it is likely that the most appropriate measure for commercial vessels will in many cases be cost based in terms of minimizing some parameter such as transport cost per ton or unit of cargo (e.g. in case of container). An Overview of Container Transportation It is a scientific fact that marine transportation is 7 times cheaper than airway transportation and 2.5 times cheaper than road transportation. The most significant development seen in the marine transportation during this century is the use of containers. The fact that USA, where the fastest development in container transportation is seen, and other countries which are the leaders of marine xiv transportation give importance to their container transportation underlines the importance of this system. In the shortest form, a container can be defined as a monoblock carriage unit having a definite dimension and weight in which many heterogeneous goods are being carried. Although there are other forms of monoblock units of carriers such as pallet, Ro-Ro, bulk etc., containers have become the inevitable means carriage in shipping recently. The following characteristics and advantages of the containers underline the inevitability of the containers for the marine transportation:. Savings in packaging expenses: Considered to be packaging material, containers provide 20% off the packaging expenses. It has been seen that the percentage of savings in expensive goods such as medicine, toy etc. increases up to 80%.. Savings in the storage expenses: Used also as a storage, containers decrease the need for a storage facility 35%.. Savings in the man power and time thanks to faster loading and unloading: While 1 1 workers can unload 10 to 20 tons of cargo from the hatch of a conventional vessel in one hour, only 4 workers can unload 300 to 350 tons of cargo from a container vessel in one hour. Theses figures are also applicable to loading.. Ease of loading and unloading: Considering that loading and unloading can be performed under any whether condition, the speed of loading and unloading of containers is worth consideration.. Savings in the insurance cost: As the containers provide effective protection, the rate of damage or theft declines substantially. The transportation insurance provide coverage for damage to or loss of containers.. Minimum damage risk: The goods are loaded into the containers in the warehouse of the shipper and unloaded in the warehouse of the consignee, so that the goods can be delivered without damage as the handling is relatively low. Costs In Ship Operation The basic definitions of cost involve the concepts of total, marginal and average cost. Total Cost (TC) is defined as the total cost of all factors of production involved in the production of a certain level of output. It is divided into two components: Total Fixed Cost (TFC) and Total Variable Cost (TVC). i.e. TC=TFC+TVC xv Fixed (or indirect) Costs are those which do not vary with output while Variable (or direct) Costs are those which do vary as output changes. Marginal Cost (MC) is the change in total cost brought about by producing one extra unit. Average Cost is the total cost of production divided by the number of units produced. Opportunity Cost is the cost which measures the cost of an item in terms of foregone alternatives. In other terms, the opportunity cost associated with choosing a particular decision is measured by the foregone benefits in the next best alternatives. It is a measure of what is given up (unable to be attained) by using resources in one way rather than another; for example the opportunity cost of ship's time is the profit foregone when the ship is delayed. The cost of running a ship depends on a combination of three factors. First, the ship itself sets the broad framework of costs through its fuel consumption, the number of crew required to operate it and its physical condition, which dictates the requirement for repairs and maintenance. Secondly, running costs depend on the cost of brought- in items, particularly bunkers, wages paid to the crew and the level of repair costs, all of which are subject to general trends in world prices. Thirdly, the level of costs is influenced by the efficiency with which the owner manages the operation of the ship, including the administrative overhead. Unfortunately in shipping there is no internationally accepted standard cost classification and this can easily lead to confusion over terminology. Although definitions are not always precise on the structure of ship's costs, for example, "operating costs" sometimes includes capital costs, sometimes does not and sometimes they are synonymous with "running costs" etc.. The approach used in the present work is to classify costs into three categories: Capital costs, which cover interest and capital repayments and are determined by the way in which the ship has been financed. This, in its simplest form, is the actual cost of the ship. It is a sunk cost and in the short term, at least, it must be regarded as a fixed cost. A ship is however, as a mobile asset, more easily sold in the international sale and purchase market than a car factory. Some ship owners are in fact more interested in buying and selling ships for profit than in employing them in the carriage of cargo. The capital cost can be reduced to an annuity by dividing it by the appropriate annuity factor. The resulting annual capital cost (or charge) may be considered to include depreciation and interest on capital. The term "capital cost" may be modified by including the effects of loans, interest, tax and capital allowance (i.e. depreciation for tax purposes). A capital cost may be turned into a variable cost by means of a short term "lease" or bareboat charter. For the purposes of voyage estimating which is primarily an exercise in accounting, annual capital cost may be considered as equivalent to "depreciation". This is xvi commonly calculated by the "straight line" method where annual depreciation is simply the capital cost of the ship divided by the projected economic life. Depreciation does not include return on capital or profit, so that Net Profit = Gross Profit (i.e. Revenue - Operating costs) - Depreciation. Operating costs, which constitute the expenses involved in the day-to-day running of the ship-essentially those costs such as crew, stores and maintenance that will be incurred whatever trade the ship is engaged in. These comprise certain costs that must be incurred, provided the vessel is in service. Essentially, they do not vary with the specific voyage and are time related. Although these costs may appear to be fixed in some sense, they are variable predominantly with the output (measured in ton-miles). Thus, in port, the running costs are related to the time taken in loading and discharging, while at sea they are related to the number of miles steamed. Running costs, in broad terms, are considered to comprise:. Crew Salaries and leave allowances as well as other ancillary expenses of training, pensions, travelling etc.. Insurance (Hull & Machinery). This covers total loss as well as damage to hull from collision and stranding. It also covers certain third-party claims.. Protection & Indemnity. Many ships are entered with P & I Clubs that indemnify owners against losses arising from strikes, quarantine restrictions, breakdowns and offer protection against claims, often involving negligence, that are not covered by the hull insurance policy. The clubs are non-profit making so that cost varies according to the claims that were settled.. Maintenance of hull and equipment including painting and cleaning, the overhaul of machinery, firefighting and lifesaving appliances.. Stores. The supply of consumable stores; ropes, paints, cleaning materials for deck, cabin, galley and engine room.. Spares. Mainly for machinery. Victuals. Food and beverages for crew. Lubricating Oil. This is an expensive item for diesel powered ships. Although included as a running cost it should be more properly be considered as a voyage cost. Dry-docking & Surveys. Surveys and dry-docking are required to comply with regulations and/or keep the ship in class with one of the classification societies such as Lloyd's Register or Bureau Veritas. Owners try to postpone dry-docking as long as possible by using underwater inspection and hull cleaning methods. xvn . Administration. The running of a ship requires support from shore superintendents, personnel managers and accountants as well as the commercial department whose function it is to obtain employment for the vessel. The running costs are, apart from insurance (which is greatly reduced) and certain administrative costs, largely avoidable when the ship is in lay-up. Voyage costs, which are variable costs associated with a specific voyage, include such items as fuel, port charges and canal dues. These relate to a particular voyage being undertaken and include:. Fuel for propulsion machinery.. Port Charges including tugs, pilotage, conservancy, side wharfage, agency fees and light dues.. Cargo Handling. These include loading, discharging, trimming, lashing and provision and laying of dunnage where required. The costs of refrigeration and special preparation of holds are related to the voyage but are not specifically cargo handling costs. The hiring of cranes and other cargo handling equipment is also included under cargo handling costs. Of these costs, fuel and running costs are variable. The marginal cost is defined exclusively in terms of fuel costs. Cargo handling costs are generally related to the quantity of cargo carried and only in this sense are they variable; port charges are mainly fixed costs for the voyage though they may be considered variable to the extend that they increase with the number of voyages performed each year. The costs normally borne by the shipowner under different types of charterparty are shown in Figure 1. Other costs are normally borne by the charterer. Capital Costs *? Bareboat Charter Running Costs ? Time (Trip)Charter Voyage Costs Voyage Charter Figure 1 Shipowner's Costs Under Different Charterparty xvm Economic Models & Investment Evaluation Techniques In principle, an economic model to evaluate alternative vessel designs should incorporate the components listed in Table 4.1. If each component can be converted into an equivalent annual cost, then an economic evaluation can be carried out. For investment evaluation, the most widely used techniques are those associated with discounted cash flows. The magnitude and timing of cash payments in and out are estimated over the vessel's life for (a) acquisition cost, (b) operating costs and (c) revenue generating potential. The time value of money is recognized by discounting future cash flows at the operator's cost of capital, i.e. multiplying each year's net cash flow by (l+i)"N where N is the number of years from project start, and i the discount (or interest) rate as a decimal fraction. For example an income of $1000 due in 5 year's time has a "present value" of only $593 at 11% interest, since $593 could be invested now at 11% compound to yield $1000 in 5 years' time. Such calculations may be made in "money terms" (the actual amount in money of the day, e.g. "then" current dollars if 5 years ahead) or in "real terms" (money of constant purchasing power, e.g. "now" dollars). In the former case inflation has to be allowed for; in the latter case the interest rate will be in real terms, which is approximately the rate in money terms minus the rate of inflation. For example 11% rate in money terms is roughly 6% in real terms if inflation is 5% per annum. The three most common economic measures of merit used in the marine field are: 1. Maximum Net Present Value (NPV). The present value of the vessel's or system's income over its life minus the present value of all operating costs and acquisition costs. 2. Minimum Required Freight Rate (RFR). The necessary income per unit of capacity (e.g. passengers or cargo) to cover all operating costs and provide the required rate of return on capital invested in the present value of all operating costs and acquisition costs. 3. Maximum Internal Rate of Return (IRR). The discount rate which gives equal present value of income and of expenditure, i.e. zero NPV. These are all variations on the concept of life cycle costing. This term implies that all elements from acquisition through operation to disposal are being considered. Each will indicate the same optimum design if applied consistently, i.e. freight rates and rates of return are compatible, so that high freight rates are allied with high rates of return (or low with low roles of return). However the difficulty of forecasting future cash flows (except in the case of long term charters) and the factors discussed above suggest that the RFR concept is likely to be the most useful long-run economic criterion in establishing the most economic vessel design. For those vessels which do not generate an income, minimizing Average Annual Cost can be used to compare alternatives which have equal annual performance capability. In this case, all costs are discounted to year zero, to give Present value of Costs xix which can be converted to an equivalent annual amount via the Capital Recovery Factor. Capital Recovery Factor (CR) converts a present sum into a uniform annual amount which recovers both the invested capital and provides the specified rate of return on capital. Its reciprocal, the Series Present Worth Factor, converts a series of uniform cash flows into an equivalent present sum. Incremental yield is a variant which calculates the yield on an additional investment, e.g. an extra piece of equipment of a ship, to show whether the rate of return on this incremental investment is at least as high as that on the basic ship. Permissible price can be used when assessing market prices of newbuilding prospects or the purchase of a second-hand ships, and comparing this price against current ship prices and current freight rates. The criterion of payback period may still sometimes be met in the industry. This is the number of years it takes the net revenue to accumulate to the level where it equals the investment While payback period is numerically equal to SPW for uniform cash flows, it should not be used for non-uniform cash flows, as all income and expenditure for years beyond the payback period is completely ignored. Nor can it cope with the economic complexities, so its use is not recommended. Applications Of Cash Flow Analysis In general terms, there are two methods of cash flows analysis, which provide different types of information about shipping business: 1. The Annual Cash Flow Analysis- ACF, is concerned with computing the total cash flow for the business unit during a full financial year, probably encompassing several different voyages and ships. It shows whether the business as a whole will generate enough cash to fund its operations after taking account of complicating factors such as tax liabilities and capital repayments. 2. The Voyage Cash Flow Analysis-VCF, is concerned with computing the cash flow on a particular ship voyage or combination of voyages, with the specific objective of assisting the shipowner in deciding whether the voyage is worth undertaking or in deciding which ship to use on a particular voyage where there are several options. These two different methods are complementary and approaches the cashflow in a different way appropriate to the needs of different decisions. As applications to voyage and annual cashflow analyses, a two-stage investment appraisal problem was selected in this work. xx Let us assume that an investor shipowner decides upon a newbuilding project container ship with 600 TEU capacity. For this, he had already made a preliminary research in the shipping market and collected some data and information on such type of vessels. The owner wishes to make his own calculations and then prepare an economic feasibility to offer to the State for subsidies and to his financier bank for a long-term loan borrowing. He desires to follow the procedure of calculation in conjunction with two following essential goals:. to find out conditions under which the ship will return the highest economic efficiency per voyage,. to decide whether the investment as a whole is economically meaningful and whether it is worth to undertake through some known investment criteria, considering life cycle costs and earnings of the ship. Under three various scenarios, namely America Line Scenario (Istanbul-Newyork, Newyork-istanbul), Continent Line Scenario (Istanbul-Rotterdam, Rotterdam- istanbul) and Far East Line Scenario (Istanbul-Singapore, Singapore-Istanbul), the first stage involves realizing of a voyage cashflow analysis through a voyage simulation model. An example of a typical voyage cash flow analysis model is given in Figure 5.1 and Figure 5.2. The second stage is then to make a year-by-year cashflow analysis by building an economic model (Figure 5.4). So, the solution to the problem is focused on the comparison of route analysis-based operation scenarios. Conclusions & Recommendations A spreadsheet model was developed and used to simulate ship's voyage in economic viewpoint. The model dealt with the voyage cash flow analysis which provided information about the cash generated by undertaking a particular voyage. It is clear that the voyage cash flow analysis has its primary application in making operating decisions. The aim of the calculation was to determine how much cash the voyage would actually generate. Results form the voyage cashflow analysis are shown in Table 6.1 and Table 6.2. As it may be seen from Table 6.2, all the three scenarios' results are satisfactory because freight rates that are earned for a single round trip voyage are higher than calculated breakeven freight rates. So from the viewpoint of decision making, it is always better to accept any of three voyages at relevant levels of freight rates and utilization rates on those routes, than to lay up the vessel from the voyage. Because there is still a daily running cost that must be paid each day of the year, regardless of whether the ship has a cargo or not. Furthermore, a better decision is to operate the vessel on Far East Line, since the highest net voyage profit per mile is earned on this route. So it may be said that Far East Line is the most profitable. Results from the annual cashflow analysis is given in Table 6.3. xxi The net present value of the vessel is approx. $16,600,000. The expected rate of return of approx. 63.7% which the owner calculated is five times greater than the level of rate of return of 1 2% (may be also called equivalent interest rate of return of investment) he aimed before. The right decision for him is to invest in the vessel. But still a better decision is to invest in a vessel which is to operate under Far East Scenario's conditions. The annual and cumulative cashflows (cashes in hand at period ends) generated in all three scenarios are shown in Table 6.4 and Figure 6.1. The payback periods of investment depend on the scenarios: in the beginning of the 8"' year for America Line Scenario, in the second half of the 8th year for Continent Line Scenario and in the very beginning of the 7* year for Far East Line Scenario. A positive annual cashflow occurs from the first year of operation. Cumulative cashflows have an increasing trend during the vessel's life. Except the year of building (0th year) the shipowner is very optimistic on the situation (the 0th year he uses an overdraft credit loan to cover cash deficits he faces during the period). In the light of above remarks, the shipowner who needed a 7-year loan at the start of the business, is now capable of making loan repayments and interest payments as per amounts and schedule upon which he agreed with his bank. Recommendations given below are to be taken into consideration for improvement of the models used for voyage cashflow and annual cashflow analyses. They are important since they are supposed to make contributions to weak points of the work, although they include in the scope of the present study.. With additional formulas and some modifications in the algorithm, the model may be compatible with other type of vessels, which allows the user to make different analyses.. If it is coded as a Windows based software with the help of a visual programming language, a more detailed and efficient imput may be achieved by user through a powerful interface.. Speed penalties due to wave, wind and hull resistance because of roughness and fouling are not taken into account by the model. For further work, a tool allowing a detailed analysis of speed losses must be introduced into the model.. For a more detailed calculation of annual dry-docking & survey and special surveys' expenditures, operations list form classification societies and relevant prices from shipyards' tariffs may be obtained. So exact values may be introduced in the analysis to give more prrecise results.. Modifications in the algorithm may allow the model to find solutions to more complex problems such as container vessel fleets' voyage and annual cashflow analyses. xxu More sensitive results of forecasting future cashflows may be obtained by introducing inflation and escalation factors into the analysis. For a good feasibility reflecting proper results, market research is absolutely necessary. Supply and demand for container transportation must be investigated not only for today but also for the future. Thus, a proper forecast about freight rates may be made. Furthermore, a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses. Opportunities, Threads) analysis must be made to find out competitor's advantages and disadvantages more closely. A sensitivity analysis tool may be introduced into the model so that it could allow the analyst to evaluate the effects of the parameters on the results. Investing in ships is in general a risky project with a high level of uncertainty. Moreover, it not always easy to analyse and predict future cashflows because they are influenced by many and complex parameters. For these reasons, uncertainty and risk effects should be included in the analysis. There are many tools developed to evaluate these effects. Accordingly, the model should include the capability of appraising an investment under uncertainty and risk.