by Yium Tavarolit Chief Secretary and Economist International Rubber Consortium Limited (IRCo)
description
Transcript of by Yium Tavarolit Chief Secretary and Economist International Rubber Consortium Limited (IRCo)
Regional Demand Analysis & Outlooks:Regional Demand Analysis & Outlooks:China, India & ASEAN Consumption & Usage ForecastsChina, India & ASEAN Consumption & Usage Forecasts
Presented at Presented at
Thai Rubber Conference 2007Thai Rubber Conference 2007
byby
Yium TavarolitYium Tavarolit
Chief Secretary and EconomistChief Secretary and Economist
International Rubber Consortium Limited (IRCo)International Rubber Consortium Limited (IRCo)
VenueVenue
Royal Orchid Sheraton Hotel, BangkokRoyal Orchid Sheraton Hotel, Bangkok
5 July 2007 5 July 2007
2
Table 1. Global rubber production and annual % change by year (1995–2006)
I. Asia-Pacific Rubber Consumption AnalysisI. Asia-Pacific Rubber Consumption Analysis
YearYear NR NR (‘000 tons)
%% SR SR (‘000 tons)
%% TotalTotal(‘000 tons)
%%
1995 6,040 - 9,430 - 15,470 -
1996 6,440 6.62% 9,760 3.50% 16,200 4.72%
1997 6,460 0.31% 10,080 3.28% 16,540 2.10%
1998 6,840 5.88% 9,880 -1.98% 16,720 1.09%
1999 6,810 -0.44% 10,390 5.16% 17,200 2.87%
2000 6,762 -0.70% 10,818 4.12% 17,580 2.21%
2001 7,238 7.04% 10,483 -3.10% 17,721 0.80%
2002 7,302 0.88% 10,882 3.81% 18,184 2.61%
2003 7,975 9.22% 11,390 4.67% 19,365 6.49%
2004 8,654 8.51% 11,989 5.26% 20,643 6.60%
2005 8,777 1.42% 12,078 0.74% 20,855 1.03%
2006 9,188 4.68% 12,515 3.62% 21,703 4.07%
Average 3.95% 2.64% 3.14%Source: IRSG
3
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
(Mil
lio
n T
on
s)
NR
SR
Total
3.14%
2.64%
3.95%
Figure 1. Global rubber production by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
4
YearYearNR NR
(‘000 tons)%%
SR SR (‘000 tons)
%%TotalTotal
(‘000 tons)%%
1995 6,000 - 8,220 - 14,220 -
1996 6,110 1.83% 9,590 16.67% 15,700 10.41%
1997 6,470 5.89% 10,010 4.38% 16,480 4.97%
1998 6,540 1.08% 9,870 -1.40% 16,410 -0.42%
1999 6,660 1.83% 10,290 4.26% 16,950 3.29%
2000 7,381 10.83% 10,764 4.61% 18,145 7.05%
2001 7,333 -0.65% 10,253 -4.75% 17,586 -3.08%
2002 7,628 4.02% 10,724 4.59% 18,352 4.36%
2003 8,033 5.31% 11,404 6.34% 19,437 5.91%
2004 8,581 6.82% 11,894 4.30% 20,475 5.34%
2005 8,994 4.81% 12,010 0.98% 21,004 2.58%
2006 8,956 -0.42% 12,617 5.05% 21,573 2.71%
Average 3.76% 4.09% 3.92%
Table 2. Global rubber consumption and annual % change by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
5
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
(Mill
ion
Ton
s) NR
SR
Total
3.92%
4.09%
3.76%
Figure 2. Global rubber consumption by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
6
YearYearNR NR
(‘000 tons)%%
SR SR (‘000 tons)
%%TotalTotal
(‘000 tons)%%
1995 1,620 - 2,410 - 4,030 -
1996 2,100 29.63% 2,350 -2.49% 4,450 10.42%
1997 2,090 -0.48% 2,420 2.98% 4,510 1.35%
1998 2,390 14.35% 2,430 0.41% 4,820 6.87%
1999 2,540 6.28% 2,530 4.12% 5,070 5.19%
2000 1,950 -23.23% 2,590 2.37% 4,540 -10.45%
2001 1,972 1.13% 2,960 14.29% 4,932 8.63%
2002 1,705 -13.54% 3,150 6.42% 4,855 -1.56%
2003 1,735 1.76% 3,169 0.60% 4,904 1.01%
2004 1,768 1.90% 3,349 5.68% 5,117 4.34%
2005 1,568 -11.31% 3,599 7.46% 5,167 0.98%
2006 1,760 12.24% 3,759 4.45% 5,519 6.81%
Average 1.70% 4.21% 3.05%
Table 3. NR, SR, Total rubber stocks and annual % change by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
(Mill
ion
Ton
s) NRSRTotal
3.05%
4.21%
1.70%
Figure 3. NR, SR, Total rubber stocks by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
8
YearYearNR NR
(‘000 tons)%%
SR SR (‘000 tons)
%%TotalTotal
(‘000 tons)%%
1995 780 - 760 - 1,540 -
1996 810 3.85% 870 14.47% 1,680 9.09%
1997 910 12.35% 995 14.37% 1,905 13.39%
1998 839 -7.80% 1,000 0.50% 1,839 -3.46%
1999 852 1.55% 1,285 28.50% 2,137 16.20%
2000 1,150 34.98% 1,455 13.23% 2,605 21.90%
2001 1,330 15.65% 1,575 8.25% 2,905 11.52%
2002 1,395 4.89% 1,750 11.11% 3,145 8.26%
2003 1,525 9.32% 1,255 -28.29% 2,780 -11.61%
2004 1,865 22.30% 2,438 94.22% 4,303 54.77%
2005 2,045 9.65% 2,580 5.85% 4,625 7.50%
2006 2,170 6.11% 3,145 21.90% 5,315 14.92%
Average 10.26% 16.74% 12.95%
Table 4. China rubber consumption and annual % change by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
(Mill
ion
Ton
s) NR
SR
Total12.95%
16.74%
10.26%
Figure 4. China rubber consumption by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
10
YearYearNR NR
(‘000 tons)%%
SR SR (‘000 tons)
%%TotalTotal
(‘000 tons)%%
1995 517 - 133 - 649 -
1996 558 8.07% 142 6.55% 700 7.76%
1997 572 2.42% 158 11.65% 730 4.29%
1998 580 1.50% 155 -2.09% 735 0.73%
1999 619 6.69% 164 6.14% 783 6.57%
2000 638 3.00% 171 4.26% 809 3.27%
2001 631 -1.11% 172 0.23% 802 -0.83%
2002 680 7.83% 192 11.65% 872 8.65%
2003 717 5.46% 203 5.95% 920 5.56%
2004 745 3.93% 223 9.65% 968 5.19%
2005 789 5.89% 233 4.80% 1,023 5.64%
2006 816 3.45% 263 12.68% 1,079 5.55%
Average 4.28% 6.50% 4.76%
Table 5. India rubber consumption and annual % change by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
11
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
(Mill
ion
Ton
s) NR
SR
Total
4.76%
4.28%
6.50%
Figure 5. India rubber consumption by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
12
YearYearNR NR
(‘000 tons)%%
SR SR (‘000 tons)
%%TotalTotal
(‘000 tons)%%
1995 692 - 1,085 - 1,777 -
1996 715 3.25% 1,125 3.64% 1,839 3.49%
1997 713 -0.21% 1,163 3.42% 1,876 2.01%
1998 707 -0.80% 1,122 -3.53% 1,829 -2.49%
1999 734 3.80% 1,133 0.97% 1,867 2.07%
2000 752 2.40% 1,138 0.41% 1,889 1.19%
2001 729 -3.01% 1,085 -4.61% 1,814 -3.97%
2002 749 2.72% 1,096 1.00% 1,845 1.69%
2003 784 4.70% 1,111 1.34% 1,895 2.70%
2004 815 3.90% 1,146 3.21% 1,961 3.49%
2005 857 5.23% 1,156 0.85% 2,013 2.67%
2006 865 0.92% 1,169 1.10% 2,034 1.02%
Average 2.08% 0.71% 1.26%
Table 6. Japan rubber consumption and annual % change by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
13
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
(Mill
ion
Ton
s) NR
SR
Total
1.26%
0.71%
2.08%
Figure 6. Japan rubber consumption by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
14
YearYearNR NR
(‘000 tons)%%
SR SR (‘000 tons)
%%TotalTotal
(‘000 tons)%%
1995 874 - 503 - 1,377 -
1996 893 2.19% 458 -9.03% 1,350 -1.91%
1997 873 -2.24% 459 0.35% 1,332 -1.36%
1998 838 -3.96% 448 -2.46% 1,286 -3.45%
1999 917 9.40% 493 10.14% 1,410 9.66%
2000 1,007 9.80% 574 16.34% 1,581 12.09%
2001 1,073 6.60% 538 -6.24% 1,611 1.94%
2002 1,114 3.82% 580 7.84% 1,695 5.16%
2003 1,108 -0.59% 587 1.15% 1,695 0.01%
2004 1,233 11.28% 640 9.01% 1,872 10.49%
2005 1,261 2.34% 688 7.53% 1,950 4.12%
2006 1,285 1.85% 765 11.18% 2,050 5.14%
Average 3.68% 4.17% 3.81%
Table 7. Asian rubber consumption and annual % change by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
15
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
(Mill
ion
Ton
s) NR
SR
Total
3.81%
3.68%
4.17%
Figure 7. Asian rubber consumption by year (1995–2006)
Source: IRSG
16
Figure 8. Trends in demand for tires (2005–2020)
Source: IRSG, IRCo
05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
U.S.A. EU. Asia
Asia
EU.
U.S.A.
17
II. Demand Projection and Forecast (from 2007 to 2035)II. Demand Projection and Forecast (from 2007 to 2035)
Source: LMC
Table 9. Consumption of NR & SR(1995–2006) and forecast (2010-2035)
YearRubber (Million Tons)
YearRubber (Million Tons)
NR SR Total % NR SR Total %
1995 6.00 8.22 14.22 - 2004 8.58 11.89 20.48 5.35%
1996 6.11 9.59 15.70 10.41% 2005 8.99 12.01 21.00 2.54%
1997 6.47 10.01 16.48 4.97% 2006 8.96 12.62 21.57 2.71%
1998 6.54 9.87 16.41 -0.42% 2010 9.53 14.13 23.66 9.69%
1999 6.66 10.29 16.95 3.29% 2015 10.60 15.58 26.18 10.65%
2000 7.38 10.76 18.15 7.08% 2020 11.68 16.99 28.67 9.51%
2001 7.33 10.25 17.59 -3.09% 2025 12.78 18.45 31.23 8.93%
2002 7.63 10.72 18.35 4.32% 2030 13.89 19.86 33.75 8.07%
2003 8.03 11.40 19.44 5.94% 2035 15.03 21.26 36.29 7.53%
18
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 10 15 20 25 30 35
(Mill
ion
Ton
s)
NR SR Total
3.92%
9.06%
Source: LMC
Figure 9. Consumption of NR & SR(1995–2006) and Forecast (2010-2035)
19
YearYear
TOCOMTOCOM
%%
PhysicalPhysical
%%
CorrelCorrel.. CorrelCorrel..
RSS 3RSS 3 Average PriceAverage Price [[22] ] VS VS [[44]] [[33] ] VS VS [[55]]
((YenYen//kgkg)) ((US Cents/kgUS Cents/kg))
[[11]] [[22]] [[33]] *[*[44]] [[55]] [[66]] [[77]]
1995 153.01 - 154.41 -
1996 147.90 -3.34% 130.82 -15.28%
1997 118.73 -19.72% 95.8 -26.77%
1998 92.80 -21.84% 67.35 -29.70%
1999 72.28 -22.11% 60.31 -10.45%
2000 74.86 3.57% 64.62 7.15%
2001 66.60 -11.03% 54.28 -16.00% 97.46%97.46% 75.09%75.09%
2002 99.17 48.90% 75.39 38.89%
2003 128.75 29.83% 102.25 35.63%
2004 140.59 9.20% 123.96 21.23% 1919
2005 165.49 17.71% 141.95 14.51%
2006 243.91 47.39% 198.55 39.87% 99.10% 88.12%
97.73% 94.66%
Source: IRCo
Note: *[4] from average NR price of SIR20, SMR20, STR20 and RSS3
Table 10. RSS3 price on TOCOM and physical average price
III. Regional Rubber Prices Movements and ConcernsIII. Regional Rubber Prices Movements and Concerns
MovementMovement
20
20406080
100120140160180200220
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06
US Cents/kg
20406080100120140160180200220240260
Yen/kg
Physical Price Average (US Cents/kg) TOCOM RSS 3 (Yen/kg)
-12.41%
30.61%
-15.18%
30.03%
Source: IRCo
Figure 10. RSS3 price on TOCOM and physical average price
21
19951995: Tight regional supply due to heavy rainfall and floods and high overseas demand
19961996: Increased supply and surplus in China, high unemployment in Europe, and slack automobile market and troubled tire industry
19971997: Cheaper Indonesian natural rubber, 13,000 workers struck at Goodyear Tire and Asian economic crisis in the mid - year
19981998: Increased supply, economic slowdown in Asia, weak Ringgit, INRO Council agreed to dispose 55,000 tons per quarter
19991999: INRO liquidated its stocks, soft demand, aggressive offers of exporters
20002000: (Unusual phenomenon) oil price climbed to US$37.15, highest Nymex record in the last 10 years, heavy floods in the South of
Thailand and Peninsular Malaysia, output down by 30-50%
20012001: Continuous rain reduced supplies by 30-40%, INRO completely liquidated all its stocks, and signing of Bali Declaration
by Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia to cut back production by 4% and exports by 10% beginning 2002
Source: IRCo
22
20022002: Tight supply, the news of delayed shipments, strengthening of Rupiah, Thai Baht, low rubber stocks at Japanese warehouses,
and establishment of International Rubber Consortium Limited( IRCo)
20032003: Tight supply due to rain, low Chinese and Japanese stocks, and unfavorable weather caused raw material shortage, strong
buying interest from China and tire-makers and futures markets
20042004: Shortage of supplies during wintering season, China announced that it would increase consumption by 130,000 tons,
active rubber futures markets, crude oil prices on Nymex surged over US$50 a barrel, strengthening Thai Baht and Rupiah, active buying activities from China and tire-makers, and Tsunami on 26
December caused worries over tight supplies
20052005: Tight supplies, strong demand from major tire-makers, low stocks in China and Japan, hike in oil prices to US$70.85 a barrel
on 29 August, floods in the South of Thailand and Malaysian Peninsular, and typhoon Damrey hit Hainan on 26 September
Source: IRCo
23
20062006: Global economy remained firm, supply and demand looked balanced but the rubber price shot up to the peak in early July due to high speculation and over-bought, especially on TOCOM. The rubber price fell to the floor in late November before rebounding
afterwards. We saw delayed shipments of exporters in the first half of the year and defaults in taking delivery of buyers in the second
half of the year
20072007: firm global economy, tight supplies during Jan – May, Floods in Northern Sumatra in Indonesia and Souhthern Malaysia, early
wintering in Southern Thailand was expected to reduce production by around 30 – 40 percent, strengthening of regional currencies and the China’s yuan, China has changed its strategy to buy from hand-
to-mouth, TOCOM is less aggressive than last year.
Source: IRCo
24
Movement (con’t)Movement (con’t)
The FallThe Fall: came from (1995 – 2001)
• Less bargaining power of NR producing countries despite firm global economy
• Asian economic crisis in mid-1997
The RiseThe Rise: has come from (2002 – the present)
• The global economy has rebounded to the present
• The China factor
• Establishment of Tripartite rubber cooperation among Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia
Source: IRCo
25
ConcernsConcerns
• Economic imbalance between the U.S. and China will decelerate the global economic growth
• Possibility of China’s economic bubble if the government cannot administer the fiscal and financial policies efficiently and
effectively
• High oil prices will decelerate the global economic growth
• Strong influence on rubber futures by hedge funds will remain
• Imbalance of rubber supply and demand might be seen
• Geopolitical confrontation will be more severe and will be a bearish factor for the rubber industry
• Global climate change will affect the NR production pattern
Source: IRCo
26
How to get rid of these concernsHow to get rid of these concerns
Strategies:-Strategies:-
• Manage NR supply to meet its demand at a remunerative and sustainable price for both producers and consumers through
“The Tripartite Rubber Council: ITRC.”
Source: IRCo
• To manage NR marketing and to stabilize rubber prices by regional cooperation through “International Rubber
Consortium Limited: IRCo”
27
Thailand
MalaysiaIndonesia
Rubber Auction Market Networking
Buyers
Products: RSS3, STR20, SIR20, SMR20
Source: IRCo
• To strengthen physical rubber markets by establishing “rubber auction markets and their networks” among the ITRC
28
Strategies:- (con’t)Strategies:- (con’t)
• Encourage domestic rubber investment to create value-added rubber products
• ITRC’s governments have to invest in Human Resource Development (HRD) to increase rubber productivity, to lower
cost of production, and to improve rubber technologies
• MIS of IRCo
Source: IRCo
29
MIS of IRCoMIS of IRCoRubber Database storing on IRCo’s Website 2007
Supply Demand Prices Stocks OthersProduction
CostsEconomy Finance
- Text- Graphic- Multimedia- Statistics
Data Processing by Computer Softwares
Analytical Reports
2008
NR, SR, ForecastSMS, AETS, SMO
TireAutomobile
Relevant reports, articles, proceedings, etc
GovernmentsIRCoITRC
NTRCs Indonesia
Malaysia
ThailandBoDs
Shareholders
CSMO
Management Office
Vietnam
Indonesia
Malaysia
Thailand
Vietnam
Source: IRCo
30
IV. Regional Markets for Industrial Rubber ProductsIV. Regional Markets for Industrial Rubber Products
Table 11. Demand in Tire and non – Tire, 1995 – 2035
YearTire Non-Tire Total [2] / [6]
Volume % Volume % Volume % %
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
1995 7.42 - 7.83 - 15.25 - 48.66%
2000 9.28 25.07% 8.71 11.24% 17.99 17.97% 51.58%
2005 11.16 20.26% 9.91 13.78% 21.07 17.12% 52.97%
2010 12.69 13.71% 10.97 10.70% 23.66 12.29% 53.63%
2015 14.27 12.45% 11.90 8.48% 26.17 10.61% 54.53%
2020 15.84 11.00% 12.84 7.90% 28.68 9.59% 55.23%
2025 17.43 10.04% 13.81 7.55% 31.24 8.93% 55.79%
2030 19.03 9.18% 14.72 6.59% 33.75 8.03% 56.39%
2035 20.65 8.52% 15.64 6.25% 36.29 7.53% 56.90%
*** In Million TonsSource: LMC & IRCo
31
Figure 11. Demand in Tire and non – Tire, 1995 – 2035
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
(Mill
ion
Ton
s)
Tire Non-Tire Total
Source: LMC
32
ConclusionConclusion
• Asia-Pacific will be the biggest rubber consumers, especially China and India because of an increase of domestic demand in vehicles. Asia-Pacific will the major production bases of tires and non-tire
goods for the global market
• Demand of rubber in the region will grow by 9.06 % during 2010 – 2035 as compared to 3.92 % during 1995 – 2006 that means the world
needs additional 14.72 million tons of rubber in 2035
• Regional rubber prices in the future will depend on the global economic and population growth, energy prices and demand and
supply of natural rubber (NR), and the cooperation among rubber producing countries. For this reason, NR producing countries have to
manage its supply efficiently to prevent any surplus of NR in the rubber market
• Regional markets for industrial rubber products for both tire and non-tire sectors will rise at a regressive rate due to substitution of
other raw materials
33
Thank You Thank You
for Your Attentionfor Your Attention