Analytics
HERE WE VE COME
Vladimir Novoselov
Well, we’ve successfully lived out of the first crisis year. Why successfully? At least because the majority of serious participants of the market of construction and road-building equipment (SDM) survived, despite of the incurred losses. The losses were different: some suffered more, some – less. The greatest recession was designated in the segment of new import equipment, in the domestic production of business on the whole were nevertheless slightly better. Some of our enterprises managed to "put" in lists on delivery of equipment within the limits of several federal programs, having provided itself at least some "living wage". Thus, it is possible to consider that the native state more or less supported some separately taken domestic producers. The foreign manufacturers didn't have any of such support which from the point of view of common sense is quite logically. However, if to recollect Putin's statement which was made some years ago, concerning the refusal of subsidizing of inefficient production branches, probably, the present situation with "support" of some and «non-support» of others is a business of time (considering low efficiency of the overwhelming majority of domestic manufacturers SDM). In a number of other countries, their governments support local manufacturers, entering protecting measures against penetration of foreign construction and road-building equipment. In our country such measures were not taken yet, so our factories had to please themselves with the small measures. Certainly, a certain role in a little bit better position of the domestic enterprises is its cheapness of equipment that is let out in our country. The displacement of demand aside inexpensive machines also proves to be true in essentially increasing share of the second-hand SDM in the structure of import.
Let's consider more in detail the situation with manufacture and import of construction and road-building equipment during the first 3 quarters of leaving year.
Domestic production
As it has already been told above, the falling in domestic production of SDM on the whole was less considerable, than in the import segment. However if to consider the situation at separately taken enterprises the picture will turn out more ambiguous. At some the release of the equipment in comparison with the same period of last year decreased by 1,5 times, at some – by 10 times, and some had not made any car at all this year. During 9 months of the current year manufacturers were engaged in sale of what was made in 2008. Somehow to unload platforms of finished goods and to receive for it ready cash, the enterprises offer consumers every possible actions, discounts, etc., that is all that is capable to make the equipment enough more accessible.
Certainly, the falling of domestic production of SDM which had taken catastrophic scales caused a mass reduction of personnel. Considering all this, the management of the enterprises' majority managed to find resources for working out some new models of equipment to offer, after the crisis termination, to the market a modern demanded production. This tendency was brightly enough viewed at the exhibition « STT’ 2009 ». Many Russian enterprises – by the way, participated in the exhibition, despite of crisis, – was shown to consumers the newest development of the equipment which let out by them traditionally, aw well as of the machines meant for the new segments of the market.
The greatest losses were incurred with the segment of crawler excavators. And the most strongly crisis struck on the enterprises differed before in the greatest volumes of production. On the average across Russia the release of caterpillar excavators decreased by 23 times (during 9 months in 2009, 37 machines are made). Their manufacture was completely stopped at the excavator factory «Kovrovez» of Group GAS and at Ural Carriage-Building Plant. By 25 times the release at KranEx had fallen. 2,5-fold decrease in volumes of manufacture is noted at the factory « Donetsky Excavator ».
Here it is necessary to notify, that for last years this enterprise – the only thing in Russia at which the release of excavators with a cable suspension bracket of the jib was still going on, – produced insignificant quantity of excavators owing to a low demand for machines of such type. Voronezh Excavator factory «VEKS», being in competitive management, lives during the last years in its hardest times. For the last 7 years the factory annually gave out to the surface on the average some tens machines. For the considered period of this year at VEKS 4 excavators were made.
In the segment of wheel dredges worked only the factory « the Tver Dredge » of Group GAS. Ural Carriage-Building Plant and EXMASG stood idle. The manufacture of wheel dredges at the Tver Dredge had fallen by 10 times and made 187 units.
For not-full-drive dredges which are based on wheel tractors (dredges-bulldozers and dredges-loaders), the situation appeared slightly better. On the average at Russian enterprises the release volume was decreased by 4 times (305 cars were made) *. The manufacture at SAPEKS hadn't almost suffered: the release fell only by 1,3 times. The greatest – 15-fold – failure is at ELAZ. At Donetsky machine factory dredges-bulldozers and dredges-loaders were produced less by 8 times, at OZTM – by 3,5 times. At Belarus Amkodore the production decreased by 5 times.
The manufacture of front loaders at the Russian factories had fallen by 4,8 times (116 units had been let out). The minimum losses in this segment incurred TChTz-Uraltrak – falling down by 48 %. We will notice that this enterprise more recently started to master the release of front loaders so initially volumes of the output were insignificant. At factory "Orel-Pogruzshik" the release decreased by 3,9 times, at factory "TCHSDM" of Group GAS the affairs were even more pitiable – the front loaders were less produced almost by 7 times.
Judging by the volumes of release of road skating rinks in 2009, the interest from side of roaders to the domestic production was minimumal. The basic Russian manufacturer – factory "Raskat" – made 64 skating rinks which is by 9 times less, than during the similar period of 2008. For comparison: Amkodor made only by 30 % less. However, at this enterprise the volume of skating rinks output initially was insignificant: for the considered period of 2008 55 cars were produced.
And here in the sphere of manufacture of other road technics – autograders – affairs went more successfully. The total volume of the release decsended by 3,9 times and it made 336 units. The most safely worked the factory «Bryansky arsenal» of Group GAS (unlike other enterprises of the division "Special equipment" of Group GAS where the production either was absolutely stopped, or it had been come to an absolute minimum). At Bryansky arsenal of autograders produced by 2,4 times less, than for the first three quarters of last year (224 pieces, or 66 % of the Russian manufacture). At other enterprise of Group GAS – TCHSDM– the release decreased by 5 times. The biggest falling in volumes of the release is noted at the Oryol factory "Dormash" – by 9,5 times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Without taking into consideration the factories "ZlatEks", «TCHZKM» and «LEKS».
In group of the Russian manufacturers of truck cranes – the most numerous among the considered segments of SDM – the manufacture had fallen by 7 times approximately (776 cranes were made), however difference at separately taken factories appeared the most essential. The minimum decrease in the release was at factory "UglichMash" – by 50 %. The four of the leading domestic enterprises entering into two large machine-building holdings («the Ivanovo mark» and "Kudesnik") – the Truck crane, Gazprom-crane and Galichsky, Klintsovsky auto-crane factories (GAKS, KAZ), – accordingly, reduced volumes of the output on the average by 6 times. The release of truck cranes at Tchelyabinsk mechanical factory (TCHMZ) was actually suspended, as well as at Ulyanovsky mechanical factory ¹ 2 (UMZ¹ 2) and Yurginsky machine factory. Any truck crane it is not made at Motor-Vilihinsky factories. In turn, at the Belarus factory "MogilevTransMash" the manufacture was decreased only by 40 %. The factory made 371 truck cranes that made half of all the Russian release of truck cranes at 11 factories.
Import
In the segment of new import cars there was the greatest recession of deliveries – by 6-38 time – in different categories of equipment. Such an enormous falling, certainly, painfully struck the majority of the foreign manufacturers working in the Russian market. In the last some years when on a wave of building boom the import of SDM annually increased by many times, a lot of the eminent companies began to consider Russia as one of the most significant and perspective partners. Alas, all turned out to be not a come-true dream. At an average volume of slump in production during the current year at many foreign companies by 40-60 % the Russian indicators of import were for them extremely painfully.
Besides the enormous recession in the import segment there also noted a redistribution of shares in the market between manufacturers. The number of participants in the market essentially decreased, in result of it many remained companies had gotten the widened shares. Some former leaders were gone from the scene. So, in 2009 from the lists in all the categories of technics the brand Hitachi which was the leading one in former years, disappeared. Volvo in many categories had every indicator to the zero too. Hidromek was gone as well. A number of other popular before western brands in our country were lost in separate segments in some positions. But this year there was a new beginner – John Deere.
The Chinese were strongly screwed: some brands which had received in our country a certain popularity in previous years, dropped out of sight, some of manufacturers left certain segments, and on the whole there are much less of the Chinese brands. The Chinese expansion which is not so long ago had given shakes both to domestic producers, and also foreigners traditionally working on our market, actually appeared a soap bubble. The development of the Chinese segment on the Russian market generally was based on network of the numerous isolated small traders who did not have neither service, nor well adjusted delivery of spare parts and account materials. Probably, the Chinese on the whole were not ready yet to serious, civilized development of the Russian market. About this says the absence of representations of the majority of the Chinese companies in Russia. All mostly was based on every possible Russian distributor of construction and road-building equipment, counting on reception of a fast profit. The situation changed, trading became unprofitable, and they departed from the affairs.
Certainly, the majority of the firms which are carrying out the deliveries of import equipment to the Russian market, during this year were not idle – it was necessary to sell last year's stocks. And it seems that the considerable quantity of not sold cars appeared at those firms which this year did not appear in the lists of importers.
«Setting» of the crawler excavator segment made 20-fold size. There were imported only 246 cars in comparison with 5094 cars, that were delivered for 9 months in 2008. Main "originator" of the setting is – Hitachi. This year there had not been imported any car of this mark to Russia. We want to notice that for 9 months of the previous year to our country there arrived 1609 dredges. The crawler excavators Volvo, New Holland, JCB were also not imported. The maximum equipment quantity – 91 unit – was put by Caterpillar. This company had 7,7-fold decrease in volumes. In relative sizes the least decrease in import at Liebherr – by 2,7 times, in absolute – there were imported 15 pieces - which is, of course, a tiny number.
Considering the wheel dredges falling appeared less, than the crawlers, – by 11,8 times, 106 cars were produced. The leader in this segment remained the former one – Hyundai: dredges of this brand were imported in the greatest quantity – 56 units. This year on the lists did not appear Hitachi, Caterpillar, Volvo, Jonyang. At Liebherr besides the minimum falling in relative sizes – by 4,5 times. In the absolute there are only 8 cars. It is interesting that at Komatsu even an increase is noted – one year ago there were 13 excavators, now became 14.
The segment of the excavator-loaders suffered a little less, than the segment of crawler excavators, – the decrease in deliveries by 19 times (totally – 178 cars). The losses – Volvo, Hidromek, SDLG. At Komatsu the volumes decreased by 52 times, at Caterpillar – by 41 times, at New Holland – by 28,5 times. In the considered category, as before, the list leads JCB – 70 cars were imported, by 15 times less, than for the considered period of 2008. It was noted in the Russian market John Deere – the first 18 excavator-loaders were imported.
The segment of front loaders still remained one of the most capacious, despite the fact that it "was blew off" in comparison with the last year's numbers by 17 times (for the considered period of 2009 178 cars were imported). In this segment, despite leaving some of Chinese brands, the equipment from the Peoples Republic of China (72 %) still predominates. From 5 to 35 % increased the share of Longgong, an absolute indicator of loaders of this mark the maximum quantity was also imported – 79 units. Not that bad feels XCMG – the second place, the market share decreased from 19 to 16 % – 36 loaders were delivered. And here one of the former leaders – SDLG – practically was gone from the field of vision: last year there were 632 loaders, this year – only two were imported. The deliveries of loaders Cheng Gong and Yutong are not fixed. Firm LiuGong conveys 3 cars, Xiamen – 2, Foton – 6 though past year each of these firms had imported to Russia an order of 150-200 loaders. In numbers of Non-Chinese the greatest losses are noted at Hitachi (there were no deliveries), JCB (one car was imported) and Doosan (there were no deliveries). Volvo, Komatsu and Hyundai feel a little better – reduction of volumes of the deliveries by tens times.
In the segment of road sealing equipment (read – skating rinks) the situation turned out to be more favorable. Here the volume of deliveries decreased only by 6,8 times (291 cars were imported). Hamm, as before, is leading, the company share increased from 23 up to 52 %, 148 skating rinks were produced. The falling of it is less, than an average in the segment (by 3,1 times). The former nearest competitor – Bomag – affairs are worse: the import volume was fallen by 20 times, the market share decreased from 17 down to 6 %. With the least losses left Ammann, Volvo, Longgong and Shantui. The volumes of skating rinks import of these brands decreased from 1,8 times at Ammann down to 2,5 times at Shantui. There were no deliveries at Sakai (occupying in 2008 the third place in the market) and Dynapac. JCB Vibromax imported only 4 machines. The popular enough Chinese and other companies this year didn't deliver any skating rinks to Russia at all.
Along with the segment of import skating rinks crisis tat least also touched the segment of autograders. Its volume decreased down by 6,4 times (52 cars were imported). Practically more or less known Chinese brands on the Russian market had dropped out of the holder, except for XCMG and LiuGong. XCMG increased the share from 31 up to 48 %. There was not a single imported car from Volvo and Terex. HBM – one of the previous leaders – produced only two autograders. But in the considered segment were noted Komatsu and John Deere.
The segment of wheel mobile cranes appeared the most failure – falling by 38,7 times (14 cars were imported). Basic "contribution" was made by Chinese – for the considered period there was not imported any crane from the Peoples Republic of China. We want to notice that the last year for companions from Heavenly Empire there were 68 % of import of mobile cranes. There also was not imported any crane from Liebherr and Sennebogen. The zero was as well at the Ukrainian manufacturers DAZK and Krajan. There were imported individual cranes from Terex, Tadano and Grove. Kato, strangely enough, it appeared in leaders. Before we received only second-hand cranes of this brand, this year there were imported whole 5 new cars.
The hinge-jointed dump-body trucks also earlier were delivered to our country in small amounts. This year their deliveries totally come to nothing. From all the former players remained only Volvo and Komatsu. Caterpillar, Terex, Bell and Astra appeared «outside the ship».
***
Here appears such a picture of the condition on the Russian market of SDM. The picture, frankly speaking, is gloomy enough. The former shy forecasts made by experts in last year – that the difficult period will last till spring – maximum till autumn of 2009, – were not justified. What waits for us ahead, it is still not clear. Though in the government any timid statements concerning that we have ostensibly reached a bottom already sound,, and that in the USA which had started the crisis, there are some weak signs of stabilisation in the economic situation. We will see. It would be very desirable to belive in it …
The author expresses gratitude for the help in preparation of this article to OOO "Academy-service" (www.ftinform.com) and to M.V.Struk, the general director of Joint-Stock Company "Stroydormash".
