Translate

Sunday, 12 March 2017

Retailers' odious supplier treatments risk disintermediation

When just four UK food retailers control over 70% of an industry you have a problem in the supply chain --- unfair  bullying of suppliers. Other risks, of course, stem from monopoly practices, like price fixing cartels working against the public interest. The latter risk, however, has been diminished by the meteoric rise of the deep discounters like Lidl and Aldi who now control 12% of the UK grocery market. It is this intensifying competition which lies behind many of the recent supplier complaints about big retailers' bullying practices, sometimes tantamount to blackmail and fraud. There is a way for suppliers to fight back but it would take an enormous degree of cooperation among suppliers, but before coming to that let's examine some of the latest wheezes that big retailers are using and which could discommode them if they persist.

Supplier complaints against the dominant retailers are nothing new, they go back 20 years, but some of the wheezes used against them are. One is for supermarkets to demand suppliers pay up to £25,000 for charity dinner tickets, according to a Government watchdog. Another of the estimated 60 odious ploys is the claim that delivered goods never arrived and retailers refuse to pay for them. The sums involved are substantial.  A preliminary investigations of only 20 suppliers found that they lost £15 million a year to "drop and drive" deliveries, implying the total amount lost to the 8,000-9,000 supplier firms must be huge. "The supermarkets are genuinely not paying for goods that they are selling," says Christine Tacon, the groceries' code adjudicator. By any other name that is fraud.

Blackmail is not beneath the retailers either. To return to the charity dinner tickets caper, one supplier complained of being asked to pay £25,000 for a table at a charity ball who came under pressure, like being told: 'Well if you don't buy a table your name will be on a list of people to the chief executive that are not supporting our charity.' Yet another innovation involves supermarkets charging suppliers up to £55 if customers complain about anything, including not liking a ready meal, and the more bizarre, like finding a teabag inside an egg. All these and many other tactics, like the old favourites of extending payment periods from one month to three and charging for favourable shelf positions, are designed to boost profits unfairly. The worsening extent of this will be unveiled by a new survey of supply firms being launched this month to uncover abuses.

Meanwhile, what can suppliers do to fight back and what risks are there for the big retailers if they do not change their bullying ways?  Already, some retailers are suffering from disintermediation by people setting up impressive websites which channel orders directly to manufacturers for delivery directly to buyers' homes, thus cutting out the bricks and mortar retailers. Moreover, one can source products from home, comparing prices in different countries for the same product to get the best deal.

The potentially greatest threat to retailers, however, lies with the capability of major and medium-sized food suppliers banding together to finance giant order picking fulfilment centres that would act like a shared user facility which some third party logistics (3PLs) suppliers already offer for their clients and who, like the food suppliers, are suffering from tough contract deals with big retailers. The foundation for that scenario is already being laid by Amazon, who are going into the food selling business to supply customers directly from their distribution centres. If enough of the major food suppliers can be signed up for such ventures it would be difficult to see how the grocery retailers could fight back, since delisting all the suppliers' items would leave them with nothing on their shelves to sell.

Now is the time for retailing's bully boys to wake up and smell the coffee before it could be too late and the 3.6 million people employed in the UK food supply chains see their ranks much diminished.
                                                          END
------------------------------------------------------------------------------











Thursday, 19 January 2017

London faces urban logistics crisis?



A major report commissioned by the United Kingdom Warehouse Association (UKWA) and delivered by the research consultancy, Global 78, entitled Feeding London 2030, warns that an urban logistics crisis is looming which if not addressed now could even lead to a shortage of essential food supplies on shelves both for grocery retailers and other food outlets. "Things are becoming stretched across London's food and drinks supply chains and current logistics thinking is no longer fit for purpose," says the report's lead author, Andrew Morgan. He continues: "New trends in the way food and drinks are bought and consumed, added to the capital's changing population profile and a transport infrastructure that is already creaking, are bringing significant challenges to food and drinks manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, caterers, transport and logistics companies. Supply in food and drink that is both safe and delivered on time to London's retail and food service outlets at an appropriate cost will become increasingly difficult unless steps are taken to address issues highlighted in the report," he warns.

Some of the issues examined in detail include:

  1. The impact of the increasingly congested urban environment
  2. New consumer demand profiles for food and drink
  3. Current trends in delivery frequencies, times and volumes
  4. Changes in the grocery retail sector that impact supply chains
  5. Significance of the hospitality and food sector
  6. Maintenance of hygiene and food safety through the supply chain
  7. The logistical pressures associated with food waste and other waste systems

The report's researchers engaged about 100 stakeholders and to give an idea of the logistics complexities in London it looked at Greenwich as a microcosm reflecting the challenges right across London. It focussed on Greenwich's 125 food outlets, where one restaurant could have 13 deliveries a day. But like any other report's predictive value, especially one covering 13 years, they are only as good as the assumptions on which their analyses are based.

One of the report's key assumptions is that London's population will grow from its present record 8.4 million by another million come 2030. Much of London's population growth in recent years has been driven by immigration but post Brexit such inflows may be sharply curtailed as Britain takes back control of its borders. Other population growth dampeners could include pressures and irritants from living in London, where housing costs, whether to buy or rent, are forcing many people to consider moving out, an easier option today thanks to IT developments that allow many more people to work from home.

Among the major irritants is the much-vexed issue of air pollution levels, 80% of which derives from road transport, routinely exceeded daily by a wide margin and leading to an estimated annual 9,000 premature London deaths and many thousands more with serious pulmonary diseases which is putting the NHS under intolerable strain. Many major cities in Europe and elsewhere are now proposing to ban diesel vehicles entirely by 2025 but Britain's logistics transport companies, at least half of whose vehicles are diesel, seem unprepared for the obvious emission controls that must come into force and which could seriously impact the report's pointers to help stakeholders "get on the right foot," to quote the report's authors. '

With those caveats in mind, the 100-page report should "provide essential intelligence for all stakeholders for successful forward planning," says UKWA's chief executive officer.
Available from UKWA at £790 or £395 for UKWA members.

Contact: Sue@ukwa.org.uk 

UKWA's CEO, Peter Ward  














----------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Thursday, 24 November 2016

New forklift attachment breakthrough transforms warehouse costs

 As all warehouse operators know, the cost of space has many facets and so is not confined to fixed costs like rent/rates, maintenance and security. Space can also affect forklift productivity in terms of pallets moved per hour and even road transport. With that in mind, the British forklift innovator, Translift Bendi, developed its mould-breaking articulated forklift in the 1980s that transformed warehouse economics like no other but there was always a perceived barrier in the minds of some users who were subject to large swings in truck usage and therefore felt they could not justify the cost of articulated trucks full-time owing to their significantly higher initial cost compared with counterbalance and reach trucks.

To resolve that issue Translift Bendi has patented what they claim is a unique breakthrough, called the SpaceMate, which is an attachment like no other that fits any forklift with no modification and without compromising the truck's sideways' stability. This means that potential buyers could use the SpaceMate to reduce operating aisle widths to 1.8 mt at one third of the cost of an articulated truck or one fifth of a conventional VNA truck.

The SpaceMate would allow conventional forklifts to provide back-up in narrow aisles during busy, seasonal periods or as a standby if a truck breaks down. It is not meant to replace the articulated forklifts but rather complement them because many potential users are deterred from narrowing their aisles by the perceived high initial cost of an articulated truck. Thus, SpaceMate is an entry level solution, with the additional benefit for some users who can only afford one narrow aisle machine and may feel too vulnerable to depend on one machine and so stay with reach or counterbalance trucks.

Weighing 450 kg, with plans to make it lighter, the SpaceMate will take up only one pallet position in the racking, while waiting for breakdowns or on standby for busy periods. The Spacemate is not just designed for end users. It is also aimed at truck manufacturers and dealers who now have a low-cost "off-the-shelf" VNA solution, that can fit in the back of a service van, and be fitted by the end user with a bare minimum of training.

In operation, lasers visually positon the forklift in the ideal spot. The truck's sideshift function extends two bridge arms out of the SpaceMate into the pallet racking either side of the pallet location. The arms are tilted down slightly and placed anywhere from two to 700 mm above the racking beams. The arms are lowered until they rest with four points in contact with the racking. The "bridge" positon actuates the fork carriage, allowing it to travel out in between the bridge arms and lower the pallet into position on the racking beams.

Also suited to both gas and diesel, the SpaceMate's electrical requirement is provided by a rechargeable battery, so electrical supply from the truck is not needed. Having consulted with SEMA, Britain's experts on safety standards for pallet racking, Translift Bendi built in safety features which they believe make it far safer than conventional trucks in a number of areas. The SpaceMate's working height is only limited by the truck's maximum working height, and is easier to use at height than conventional forklifts because height selection is designed out of the system.

As any user of articulated forklifts knows the mast arrangement can swivel to either side when within racking aisles, thus enabling them to deposit and retrieve a pallet load on different sides of the aisle without having to leave the aisle and then turn around for access re-entry. This is not possible with SpaceMate, but probably more than half of all forklift pallet movements do not require that function.

Verdict: Certainly worth a second look for certain operating scenarios.

www.translift.co.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SpaceMate in action





















Friday, 11 November 2016

Will Trump learn history's lessons?


Whenever making statements at the hustings Presidential candidates often make political promises that remain unfulfilled after being elected. Hopefully, we can expect the same from Donald Trump in certain arenas, provided his advisers' words are heeded, and where they must be heeded most of all is in the field of economics. It is here that he will stand or fall in any post Trump presidency assessment and it is here, if all his pre and  post election promises are carried out, the greatest dangers lurk for all Americans and the world beyond.

Not all of Trump's pledges are unsound. The promise to shore up America's parlous, crumbling infrastructure will go down well with job-strapped voters. His economic policies with a foreign element to them, however, leave much to be desired, and could even lead to unrest at home. Take, for example, his promise to slap a 45% tariff on Chinese imports as part of a home jobs protection move. Trump should remember that according to the US Treasury the largest foreign holder of US debt is China, which owns more than $1.24 trillion in bills, notes and bonds, or about 30% of the over $4 trillion in Treasury bills, etc, held by foreign countries. In total, China owns about 7.2% of publicly- held US debt. If China stops buying America's IOUs then interest rates could rise, with knock-on effects for inflation.

China's trade with America over the last 20 years or so has been of enormous benefit to both countries, especially in helping to keep America's inflation down. Slapping huge tariff rises on Chinese imports in general would be another inflationary move that would hit the poor much harder than the rich and plunge an already battered merchant marine into greater despair. China is now ostensibly switching its economy away from an export-oriented one to a home consumer-led one and so the last thing America needs is to suffer retaliatory tariff measures. Trump's tariffs would be blatantly WTO inconsistent and so China could go straight to the WTO and would easily win the right to impose retaliatory tariffs on US exports.

In the political arena, Trump has threatened to rip up America's commitment to protect smaller NATO nations. One of the figures wrongly bandied about is that of NATO's 2015 total spending of about $900 billion the US share was $650 billion, or 72%. When looked at in detail, however, the US share is only about 22%, a good example of deception by omission, so favoured by many politicians. Weakening NATO now would not be a smart move.

In the social arena Trump's promises will also have serious economic repercussions if carried out. He has promised to deport 12 million illegal immigrants, something many Californian employers will view with palpable alarm. Trump's na├»ve views over building a 1,000-mile long wall along the Mexican border are the stuff of cloud cuckoo land. There is no wall that could not be breached, as history shows from the Great Wall of China to Hadrian's wall.

Most of all, Trump should remember two things. In terms of votes cast, Clinton polled fractionally more than Trump and already we have seen the first of riotous rumblings in Oakland, perhaps partly showing dissatisfaction over the electoral college system, so in essence he does not carry the majority support. Secondly, trade is the handmaiden of prosperity and prosperity is the surest guarantor of peace. Failure to see that would be what the ancient Greeks called hubris --- the outrageous arrogance that leads to abuse of power.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------







Monday, 5 September 2016


Do Amazon et al operations worsen health risks?


Some 35 years ago I wrote in Britain's leading logistics journal about the coming boons of online shopping and how it had the potential to disintermediate bricks and mortar retailing. One boon, in particular, was environmental, and by extension health and safety. Through their TVs and computers customers could order their whole weeks shopping from one centre and specially-equipped delivery vans would deliver to home addresses, typically fulfilling up to 50 orders in one tight delivery area, and thus replacing up to 50 customer car journeys to their local superstores. That would mean far less air pollution, traffic congestion and accidents. What was there not to like? But then came Amazon, followed by Ali Baba, et al.

Now when it comes to logistics Amazon is no slouch; how could it be when this year it is estimated they are going to sell 7.2 billion items, which could hit 12.6 billion in just four years, according to one estimate. It has taken warehousing to new levels with automation and has a patent for "anticipatory package shipping" technology. When a Prime subscriber ($99 a year) orders just one item for delivery within two days at no extra charge, Amazon already has a box standing by, ready to label and ship, a service made possible by hundreds of Ph.D mathematicians concentrating on optimising logistics.

In their quest to make their service most attractive Amazon saw prompt delivery as giving competitive edge and it has worked but others are doing likewise, with Britain's leading retailer, Tesco, now promising a three-hour delivery service. The problem, however, arises over environmental risks because more customers than ever are ordering only one or two items for home delivery which previously they would have picked up on the weekly shopping trip to their superstores. That means far more road journeys and concomitant accidents and air pollution.

Air pollution is now the number one ultimate cause of death in Britain, estimated at 60,000 a year and about 80% of air pollution is road transport related. Diesel emissions are the worst single offender, primarily owing to its sub 2.5 micron oily particulates which engine filters cannot contain and which lodge permanently in the body. These particulates are known carcinogens and a major cause of pulmonary diseases like asthma, which afflicts six million persons in Britain alone and is worsening. The health bill for all this growing air pollution is rocketing into billions of pounds a year.

Now it is true that new motive power technologies are now available, like hydrogen fuel cells and electricity generated by solar, wind and hydro, which are clean at both points of production and use. But these are still likely to take many years to replace dirty oil.

There is growing pubic resentment against Amazon's surging flood of cardboard boxes spewing forth from its many distribution centres. In Hamburg, for example, city officials said Amazon withdrew its plan to put a distribution centre near a seniors' centre and kindergarten after residents, local politicians and police complained. The mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, was miffed at the advent of Amazon's Prime Now centre in her city, warning that it would foul the air, snarl traffic and damage local businesses.

Now, of course, none of this is to say that Amazon, Ali Baba, et al deliberately set out to harm the environment and people's health. The early stages of online shopping must have delivered a net benefit on air pollution but by pandering to people's wants for instant gratification for just one or two products has reversed the early promise of a cleaner environment. Now that Amazon is going into home food deliveries it has a chance to dilute the air pollution issue by offering tempting discounts if buyers agree to fulfil all their household purchases in one hit, say once a week. Rushing through cities to deliver, say, just toilet paper and condoms, two popular Amazon items, is asinine.

                                                                   END
-------------------------------------------------------------------------









Sunday, 4 September 2016



Why logisticians should be global business savants


In recent years businesses have come to appreciate the value of good logistics to give competitive edge, with many board members now having a logistics title, but that does not mean the logistics profession gets meaningfully better, as mayhem in the container shipping world has just revealed. Just as in 2011, when the Japanese tsunami caught many logisticians with their pants down because they had put too many of their supply chain eggs in one basket (Japan), leading to multi-billion pound losses from stalled auto plants around the world, now we have a foreseeable risk from the receivership of Hanjin Shipping Co, South Korea's largest container line and the 7th largest in the world. Fortunately, it accounts for only 2.9% of the world's share of sea container shipping but it threatens to derail the supply chain of global companies that need to send goods well in advance of the year's busiest shopping season.

It will not be a swift mess to untangle because, like airlines, container lines operate in capacity-sharing alliances. That means that customers who booked cargo with other lines, like Evergreen and China Cosco, might all discover that their goods are on Hanjin ships. Meanwhile, around the world Hanjins's ships are being arrested or refused port entry because ports are worried they will not be paid. It could, therefore, take months for owners of cargo trapped on board to retrieve their cargo.

At the root of the container shipping lines' misery is not so much stalled world trade but new ship supply capacity far outstripping world trade growth, leading to a mismatch between supply and demand growth which, says Paul Slater, a Florida-based ship finance adviser, means the whole industry is in "terrible trouble. Frankly, I don't think there's a container shipping company in the entire world that's making any money," he adds.

Hanjin's collapse has caused shipping rates to spike but the benefits are likely to be short-lived. Hyundai Merchant Marine, which itself flirted with bankruptcy this year, said it will take over operating many of Hanjin's directly-owned ships, while its chartered vessels are likely to return to the market for lower lease rates. The risk from this is that unless demand grows faster than supply of vessels then further container line collapses cannot be ruled out.

It's not as though Hanjin's collapse could not be foreseen. Drewry Shipping Consultants said: "We've been warning since 2013 that Hanjin was living on borrowed time because its debt to equity ratio was over 600%."

So what lessons does this have for logisticians? It is not enough for them to know how to ensure goods flow through the global supply chain as smoothly as possible. They must be able to identify all possible risks and put in place contingency plans that either allow rapid recovery or some sort of insurance when goods are delayed by events like Hanjin. The present capacity-sharing alliances of container liners are not in the cargo owners' or forwarders' best interests. What is the point, for example, of logistician studying the final accounts of shipping lines, which should also include the crisis-hit bulkers, to apply formulae that can reasonably predict bankruptcy two years ahead with 90% accuracy, if they don't know in which container line's care their goods will end up? If reform
of the arcane complexity of the industry cannot be had then shippers should see if insurance can be obtained at a reasonable rate to protect them from supply claim risks like Hanjin

There are other measures logisticians should take to warn them of trouble ahead. They could, for example, become more aware of global economic and financials trends, that if left unchecked could create mayhem down the line. Back in January 2007 I warned in print of serious trouble ahead for the banking industry caused largely by their reckless involvement in America's sub-prime housing market. At the time, shipbuilding was on a roll with substantial orders on the blocks. That led to excessive ship capacity overhanging the market because the credit crunch stalled world trade growth. Today's shipping world is still feeling the effects of that. But it is not only shipping that is in trouble. Banks are heavily involved in underperforming shipping loans and so far have suffered heavy losses. Britain's RBS bank is now trying to exit its entire interest in Turkish shipping loans and hopes to be rid of its much bigger Greek shipping exposure. It will be lucky if it avoids a big haircut.
                                                                      END
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------







Saturday, 6 August 2016

Logisticians: Are you prepared for war in the South China Sea?

It would be difficult to overestimate the threat to logisticians' best laid plans for trade with Asia than the worsening relations between China and its neighbours over the former's illegal territorial claims to 'islands' it has developed from reefs and shoals in the South China Sea, around which there may be rich reserves of oil and gas. These 'islands' are up to 650 miles from China's coast but less than half that from other nations like the Philippines and Vietnam who are also claiming rights over the Spratly and Paracel islands.

The permanent court at the Hague recently ruled against China's so-called nine-dash line that lays claim to almost all of the South China Sea, through which about US$5.5 trillion of sea-borne trade passes every year, but China has intimated that it has no intention to respect the Hague's rulings. The sabre rattling has consequently risen. The AFP, for example, reported that a Beijing minister urged preparations for a "people's war at sea."

China's state-backed media is awash in bluster over the subject of their military and sovereignty. China's Global Times even went so far as to challenge Australia directly, saying: "If Australia steps into the South China Sea waters it will be an ideal target to warn and strike. Lian Fang, a professor at the military-run National Defence University, said: "The Chinese military will step up and fight hard and China will never submit to any country on matters of sovereignty."

Beijing has even gone so far as to unilaterally announce a "no sail zone" in international waters which directly violates international maritime laws. Such Chinese insouciance will undoubtedly invite a response from the US Government whose Navy regularly patrols the South China Sea where it now faces new militarised islands.

"The People's Liberation Army is ready," a military source told Reuters. "We'll go in and give them a bloody nose like Deng Xiaoping did in Vietnam in 1979". Not all Chinese commentators are such belligerent sabre rattlers. One Chinese source seemed especially aware of the potential catastrophe of a shooting war which could so easily emerge from the military posturing. In a statement to Reuters he said: "We cannot take on the Americans. We do not have the technology yet," implying that when they do the risk of unpleasantness will rise. He want on: "The people who would suffer would be the ordinary Chinese." But the problem is that in the Chinese psyche losing face is worse than losing honour and irrespective of the enormity of a hot war it would not take much to tip the Chinese government hotheads over the edge.

If wise counsel prevails the Chinese authorities will realize that globalisation of trade has made them more interdependent on foreign markets to sustain the growing ambitions of ordinary Chinese people who want nothing more than to be left alone to scratch an honest living in an atmosphere that nurtures working people's labour conditions. China has enough internal problems from unsustainable debt levels to rising discontent among the people over living conditions (Google my blog: China facing a double bust?). If that were not bad enough, there is always Nature preparing for the next costly disaster through earthquakes and typhoons.

In my blog of June 2015 headed: "Should China's South China Sea ambitions be thwarted?" I warned that "The potential of the rising tension has huge implications for global logistics that stretches far beyond the cost of higher insurance and the re-routing of ships to avoid the South China Sea." Since then, the tension has risen sharply and so logisticians should review their South-East Asia supply pipelines by making sure they have robust plan Bs in the event of supply disruptions. This could mean having alternative supply centres ready to swing into action, especially given the amount of trade flows geared to JIT deliveries. Logisticians, for example, might like to consider sourcing their rare earths from outside of China, which dominates the market. Another precaution could be a temporary increase in component stocks until signs of tension have eased, even if that does mean rising costs.

The alternative, if push comes to shove, could be a re-run of the 2011 Japanese tsunami chastisement in which the asininity of western corporations over reliance on Japan for 100 key products geared to JIT deliveries left car plants and other industries around the world idled for want of parts, incurring multi-billion pound losses in sales and profits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------