Status of the Earthmover Tyre Market

Transcription

GLOBAL TYRE MANAGEMENT
Technical Paper
Status of the Earthmover Tyre Market
April 2007 (V4)
Compiled by: Tony Cutler, Technical Manager
Also refer OTRACO report:
Status of EM Tyre Market – June 2004
Disclaimer:
Otraco Technical Papers are produced by OTRACO International Pty Ltd. They are intended to provide general information
and general advice on topics related to earthmover tyres and rims and are current at the time of publication. The contents do
not constitute specific advice and should not be relied upon as such. Formal advice should be sought in particular matters.
This document and any attachments are subject to copyright. No part of them may be reproduced, adapted or transmitted
without the written permission of OTRACO International Pty Ltd.
© Copyright 2007 by OTRACO International Pty Ltd
OTRACO
Status of the EM tyre market – April 2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Glossary .................................................................................................................1
Introduction............................................................................................................3
Overview................................................................................................................3
Global tyre market – all product groups ................................................................5
Global tyre market – EM tyres only ......................................................................6
5.1 EM tyre manufacturers & distributors .................................................................7
5.1.1 Established manufacturers ............................................................................7
5.1.2 Newcomer manufacturers .............................................................................8
5.1.2.1 Tyre life performance, operational and safety issues.............................9
5.1.2.2 Maintenance issues ..............................................................................10
5.1.2.3 Supply chain and related issues ...........................................................10
5.1.2.4 General.................................................................................................10
5.1.3 Tyre distributors..........................................................................................10
5.2 EM tyre factories................................................................................................11
5.2.1 Large haultruck radial tyre factories ...........................................................11
5.2.2 Other EM tyre factories ..............................................................................11
6. Global economic growth......................................................................................12
6.1 Mine product demand and prices.......................................................................12
6.2 Shipping consequences ......................................................................................13
7. Demand for EM tyres...........................................................................................13
7.1 Mining equipment production............................................................................14
7.2 Haultruck tyre demand.......................................................................................14
8. Supply of EM tyres ..............................................................................................14
8.1 Raw material supply ..........................................................................................15
8.2 Tyre production expansion ................................................................................15
8.2.1 Tyre production increases to date ...............................................................16
8.2.2 Planned tyre production increases ..............................................................16
9. Supply/demand interaction for EM tyres.............................................................18
9.1 EM tyre shortages ..............................................................................................18
9.1.1 Otraco model of EM tyre supply & demand...............................................18
9.2 EM tyre pricing pressures ..................................................................................19
9.2.1 Manufacturing input costs...........................................................................19
9.2.1.1 Freight and import duty .......................................................................20
9.2.1.2 Raw material costs ...............................................................................20
9.2.1.3 Material price and substitution.............................................................21
9.2.1.4 EM tyre manufacturing cost model......................................................21
9.2.2 Ex-works cost versus onsite tyre price........................................................22
9.2.3 EM tyre supply contracts & pricing............................................................24
10.
Conclusions......................................................................................................24
10.1 EM tyre shortages and manufacturers..............................................................24
10.2 EM tyre pricing and warranty ..........................................................................25
11.
Recommendations............................................................................................25
11.1 Tyre selection...................................................................................................26
11.2 Tyre maintenance.............................................................................................26
11.3 Tyre operation..................................................................................................26
OTRACO
11.4 Tyre awareness.................................................................................................27
11.5 Tyre supply agreements ...................................................................................27
11.6 Mine and fleet optimisation .............................................................................28
11.7 Alternatives to EM tyres ..................................................................................28
12.
References and Sources ...................................................................................29
APPENDIX 1 – EM TYRE MANUFACTURERS & DISTRIBUTORS ...................30
Appendix 1A – Major EM Tyre Manufacturers’ Radial Tyre Sizes .......................30
Appendix 1B – Major EM Tyre Manufacturers’ Bias Ply Tyre Sizes.....................30
Appendix 1C – Major EM Tyre Manufacturers’ Websites .....................................30
Appendix 1D – Minor EM Tyre Manufacturers ......................................................30
Appendix 1E – EM Tyre Distributors of Newcomer Brands ..................................30
APPENDIX 2 – EM TYRE MANUFACTURER & DISTRIBUTOR
QUESTIONNAIRES ...................................................................................................36
Appendix 2A – Manufacturer Questionnaires .........................................................37
Appendix 2B – Distributor Questionnaires..............................................................47
APPENDIX 3 – OTRACO MODEL OF EM HAULTRUCK TYRE SUPPLY &
DEMAND ....................................................................................................................51
Appendix 3A – Otraco Model Assumptions & Comments .....................................52
Appendix 3B – Announced EM Tyre Production Expansions ................................53
Appendix 3C – Otraco Model Projections...............................................................54
APPENDIX 4 – OIL, DERIVATIVES & RUBBER PRICING..................................61
APPENDIX 4A – Pricing for Oil and its Derivatives..............................................62
APPENDIX 4B – Pricing for Natural and Synthetic Rubber ..................................62
OTRACO
1.
Glossary
EM tyre
Earthmover tyre.
EM tyres range in size from 12.00x24 to 59/80R63 (the largest EM tyre in
terms of weight is a 70/70x57).The term EM tyre is typically used in
Australasia.
OTR tire
Off-The-Road tire – interchangeable with the term EM tyre.
The term OTR tire is typically used in North America. Tyre and tire are the
British and US influenced spellings, respectively.
Tyre manufacturer
The company that makes the tyre, eg. Bridgestone
Corporation.
Big-3
The three main global tyre manufacturers (in terms of all tyre
product groups, and of the EM tyre product group) –
Bridgestone, Michelin and Goodyear.
Tyre brand
The name, branded onto the sidewall of the tyre, by which the
tyre is known, eg. Bridgestone.
Apart from Chinese brands (with some exceptions) the brand name
usually reflects the name of the company of manufacture. Many Chinese
manufacturers make two or more brands of otherwise identical tyres; eg.
Haohua South China (Guilin) Rubber Co Ltd makes the Torch and
Evergreen brands of EM tyre.
Tyre distributor
A company that sells the tyre to the end user.
The three major manufacturers, Bridgestone, Michelin and Goodyear, and
to a lesser extent Toyo and Yokohama, typically sell their tyres directly.
The smaller and emerging manufacturers tend to use third party
distributors, although there are exceptions in both cases.
Tyre size
The size designation of a tyre, eg. 40.00x57, 59/80x63.
For 40.00x57, 40.00 refers to the nominal width of the tyre (inches), and
57 to the rim diameter (inches); tyres using this size convention have a
nominal aspect ratio (the ratio of tyre height to tyre width) of 1, where tyre
height is the nominal height from the tyre bead to the tyre tread face.
For 59/80x63, 59 refers to the nominal width of the tyre (inches), 80 to the
nominal aspect ratio (0.8), and 57 to the rim diameter (inches).
The x is a generic size indicator (the tyre could be a either radial or bias
ply construction); to specify radial construction, x is replaced by R, eg.
59/80R63; to specify bias ply construction the x is replaced by – , eg.
40.00-57.
Tyre construction
Tyres are typically made in one of two constructions: Radial
ply or Bias ply.
The radial design is more technologically advanced and provides higher
tyre life (typically 30-40% more than bias ply life), lower operating cost per
hour (or kilometre) and lower fuel consumption. The tyre industry moved
from bias ply to radial tyres for passenger cars in the 1960s, road truck
tyres in the 1970s, haultruck tyres in the 1980s and large wheel loader
tyres in the 1990s. The radial construction process is more complex and
tyre building equipment is more expensive – this was the hurdle to more
widespread conversion from bias ply to radial tyre construction of
1
OTRACO
mainstream EM tyre sizes in the mid 1980s. Michelin has always
manufactured tyres solely in radial construction; of the seven other major
EM tyre manufacturers at that time, only two (Bridgestone and Goodyear)
adopted radial construction for their major EM sizes, effectively creating
the “Big-3” – Bridgestone, Goodyear and Michelin.
Radial construction
Radial ply EM tyres are typically constructed from a single ply
made of steel cord that forms the casing of the tyre, with the
steel cords being oriented radially from bead to bead. The
tread area of the casing is wrapped with several steel belt
cords oriented circumferentially.
The belts closest to the casing, termed working belts, are integral to the
construction of the tyre, while the outer one to three belts are protective in
nature. The casing is attached to the two beads, each of which comprises
a single bundle of steel cords.
Bias ply construction Bias ply EM tyres (also referred to as Cross ply, X-ply or
Conventional construction tyres) are constructed from a multilayered casing (or carcass) of nylon plies, with each
successive layer set at a bias of approximately 90 degrees to
its mate.
Several protective “breaker” belts of nylon plies (steel belts are sometimes
used) are positioned in a circumferential orientation between the casing
and rubber of the tread. The casing is attached to the two beads, each of
which comprises several bundles of steel cord.
Medium haultruck
For the purposes of this paper, defined as haultrucks of 90 to
<140mt (metric tonne) / 100 to <155T (short ton) payload
capacity.
Medium haultrucks typically use 27.00x49, 31/90x49 or 30.00x51 tyres.
Large haultruck
For the purposes of this paper, defined as haultrucks of
140mt / 155T payload capacity and larger.
Large haultrucks typically use 33.00x51, 36.00x51, 37.00x57, 42/90x57,
40.00x57, 46/90x57, 50/90x57, 53/80x63, 55/80x63 or 59/80x63 tyres.
Ultra-class haultruck This is an industry accepted term referring to large haultrucks
of 270mt / 300T payload capacity and larger. The largest
ultra-class trucks are currently of 360mt / 400T capacity.
Ultra-class haultrucks typically use 50/90x57, 53/80x63, 55/80x63 or
59/80x63 tyres.
2
OTRACO
2.
Introduction
This report is an update to Otraco’s June 2004 report, entitled Status of the EM1 Tyre Market.
In that report Otraco predicted a global shortage of tyres and substantial price increases, both
of which have come to pass. This update includes details on the many alternative
manufacturers and suppliers who have emerged since the global shortage of EM tyres arose
in early 2004 and the implications of using these tyres to supplement, or replace, the
established (traditional)2 brands. It also includes the predictions of Otraco’s model for EM
haultruck tyre supply and demand through to 2010.
While the main focus of this paper relates to EM radial tyres used on medium to large
haultrucks3 – 90 metric tonne (mt)4 payload capacity and bigger – aspects concerning other
EM tyres are examined where there are particular concerns at present (eg. suitability of
alternative brand tyres of bias ply construction).
The following areas are discussed:
• Global tyre market size and supplier share
• Newcomer manufacturers and distributors
• Influences on tyre supply and demand
• Outlook for EM tyre supply and demand to 2010
• EM tyre manufacturing cost inputs and pricing
• Recommendations related to current tyre supply and demand
Recent EM tyre technical developments are referred to where they relate to market issues;
however they are generally outside the scope of this paper and are not examined in detail.
The same applies to developments in tyre retreading and, to a lesser extent, tyre repairing,
notwithstanding the fact that both have garnered considerable interest over the past three
years.
All figures quoted in this report are in US dollars and may vary from data published in other
sources depending on exchange rates used for currency conversions. The latest available fullyear tyre sales figures comparing all global tyre suppliers are for calendar year 2005 (over a
year out of date).
3.
Overview
Demand for EM tyres has increased dramatically since early 2004 due to hugely increased
demand for commodities – particularly minerals such as iron ore, copper, nickel and bauxite,
and energy products such as coal. The demand for these commodities has been driven mainly
by China and, to a lesser extent, India and Russia.
1
The term EM (Earthmover) refers to all tyres fitted to off-highway mining and construction equipment,
including underground mines. An alternative term is OTR (Off The Road) – the term EM tends to be used in
Australasia and OTR in North America. EM/OTR tyres generally range in size from 24” to 63” rim diameter.
2
We regard the traditional brands as Bridgestone, Michelin, Goodyear, Toyo, Yokohama and (to a lesser
extent) General and Pirelli.
3
Haultruck tyres typically account for 80% of mining company expenditure on EM tyres.
4
Approximately 100 short ton (T) capacity.
3
OTRACO
The demand for EM tyres since 2004 has not been matched by an equivalent increase in tyre
supply. This has led to tyre shortages (progressively worsening since 2004 to the present)
and tyre price increases for the mining industry. Otraco predicts that EM tyre shortages will
become more severe during the current year and early next year, before starting to ease in
late 2008, but with supply shortfalls probably continuing to 2010.
EM tyre manufacturing division profit margins, which had eroded from 1997 through to
2004, have since increased substantially but, according to Otraco’s tyre manufacturing cost
input model, remain well below the levels of the mid-1990s, at least for the established
brands. The established brand manufacturers, who generally distribute their products directly
to the end user (although this does vary by global region), have shown considerable
constraint in terms of tyre pricing over the past three years.
The mining industry has worked hard over since 2004 to reduce demand for new tyres by
increasing tyre life (eg. through improved mine conditions and better mine equipment
operator tyre awareness) and by new or expanded tyre repair and retread programs. Some
mines have increased average tyre life by 30% or more during this time, and this has allowed
them to ride out the supply crisis to date – even though, in many cases, mining production
has expanded to take maximum advantage of increased commodity prices.
Large, established mines, with formal tyre supply contracts with traditional tyre
manufacturers, who have made significant tyre life gains, are generally weathering the storm.
It is the new mining projects, particularly in the case of junior miners, who are having the
greatest difficulty in sourcing tyres. The same applies to equipment manufacturers who are
finding it almost impossible to provide established brand tyres as original equipment on their
machines.
A large number of new EM tyre manufacturers (in excess of 50 – mainly from China, Europe
and India) have emerged since 2004. Of these, approximately 15 make tyres of up to 40.0057 (to suit 220mt payload capacity haultrucks); however none currently makes this size tyre
in radial ply construction – only in bias ply – although the first of these newcomer 40.00R57
radial tyres will become available by year end. Some of these newcomer brands, eg.
Belshina, have been manufacturing EM tyres for many years; however they have become
widely available globally only during the current supply crisis. Once supply and demand
stabilises, most of these new manufacturers will quit the industry; nevertheless the big hurdle
to entering the market (capital and timeline) will make leaving in lean times difficult as well.
It is also very likely that one or two of the emerging manufacturers will supplement/replace
some of the existing established manufacturers.
While there are now many new brands to choose from, most of their product is of bias ply
construction, and most manufacturers are still in the product development stage – which is
typically two to three years for bias ply tyres and three to four years for radial tyres and for
tyres used on the largest haultrucks and wheel loaders. As a rule of thumb, bias ply tyre
average life is approximately 70% of that of the equivalent radial tyre made by the same
manufacturer where production quality and product development level are common for both
constructions (bias ply and radial). However, minesites around the world are routinely
experiencing bias ply tyres from the newcomer manufacturers, particularly Chinese brands,
averaging only 10% of the life of Big-3 radial tyres operating in the same application – due
to a lack of manufacturing quality and/or product development pedigree.
4
OTRACO
So basically, for the shortfall in supply of each mature, established brand radial tyre, a mine
may require between 1.5 and 10 alternative brand bias ply tyres to replace it in terms of tyre
life equivalency.
Otraco is tracking the relative performance of a considerable number of newcomer
specification tyres on the sites that we manage and consult to. We are currently compiling a
questionnaire to send to mines worldwide to seek information in relation to the relative
performance5 of newcomer brands being operated on the respective sites. We will publish a
supplement to this report once this data has been compiled and analysed.
Apart from new manufacturers, there are many newly emerged EM tyre distributors – selling
new, used, repaired and retreaded tyres, as well as tyre casings for retreading. Some of these
sellers have viewed the current supply crisis as a means of making fast profits and have
charged exorbitant prices for both new and used tyres – prices approaching US$200,000.
However these price demands are becoming less common as availability of the newcomer
brands improves, and will disappear when supply and demand imbalances settle.
And finally the industry is seeing alternatives to pneumatic EM tyres. Polyurethane tyres are
currently being trialled on at least one minesite on a large haultruck. There is still much
development work required, both in the design and manufacture of these, or alternative
material, tyres and in the progress of more sophisticated truck suspension systems that will
almost certainly be required to make non-pneumatic tyres viable.
4.
Global tyre market – all product groups
In 2005, the year for which the latest global tyre sales figures6 are available, the global tyre
market grew 9% to US$101 billion. Three companies – Bridgestone, Michelin and Goodyear
– accounted for 53% of this total, with the ten largest manufacturers representing 77% of the
market. Bridgestone Corporation took the top spot replacing Group Michelin which had held
that position for the four years to 2004.
Bridgestone tyre sales grew 11.6% to US$18.3 billion during 2005, assisted by a small
change in the yen/dollar exchange rate. Michelin sales grew just 3.6% to US$17.9 billion
with negligible influence from the euro/dollar rate during the year. Goodyear sales increased
6% to US$17.5 billion. Continental, Pirelli, Sumitomo, Yokohama, Hankook, Cooper and
Kumho took placings from four to ten, respectively, with Toyo being relegated to number 11
in 2005 (refer Figure 1).
The figures above are for all tyre sales and include subsidiary companies of the respective
manufacturers.
Of the 75 top companies, 17 are Chinese, nine are Indian, eight are US and five are from
each of Japan and Taiwan. The number of tyre factories in China grew from 62 in 2000 to 81
in 2005 while in the US the number fell during this period from 53 to 47; in Japan it
remained at 23 and in France it reduced from 22 to 18.
5
6
We will also include a section on safety related incidents associated with these newcomer brands.
Global Tyre Report 2006 published by the European Rubber Journal (ERJ).
5
OTRACO
Global tyre industry (US$101B)
Manufacturers (all industry segments)
Toyo
1.8%
Other
21.3%
Bridgestone
18.2%
Kumho
1.9%
Cooper
2.1%
Michelin
17.7%
Hankook
2.5%
Yokohama
2.9%
Sumitomo
3.6%
Pirelli
4.5%
Goodyear
17.3%
Continental
6.3%
Figure 1: Global tyre market by manufacturer – 2005 sales (Source: ERJ)
5.
Global tyre market – EM tyres only
The tyres that are of most interest to us comprise only a small part of the global tyre industry.
EM tyre sales make up approximately 6% of the total global tyre market (refer Figure 2).
Global tyre industry (US$101B)
All segments
Heavy truck
(highw ay)
26%
Earthmover
US$6.1B
6%
Tw o w heel
5%
Agricultural
2.5%
Passenger car &
light truck
59%
Aircraft
0.5%
Figure 2: EM tyres as a percentage of total tyre market – 2005 sales
6
OTRACO
Tyres for large haultrucks of greater than 140mt payload capacity constitute only 16% in
value of the total EM tyre segment (refer Figure 3). Approximately US$970 million is spent
per annum on these large haultruck tyres – less than 1% of annual global tyre sales.
At the end of 2005, North America remained the major market for large haultruck7 tyres,
followed by Australasia, South America, Africa, Asia and Europe.
The demand for ultra-class (270mt and larger) trucks and tyres continues to grow relative to
smaller haultrucks, with copper mines (in Chile, USA and Indonesia) being the major user of
ultra-class trucks, followed by coal mines (in USA, Australia, Indonesia and Colombia)
followed by oil sands operations (in Canada).
Earthmover tyres (US$6.1B)
Large haultrucks vs. rest
Large
haultrucks
(140mt & larger)
US$970M
16%
Other earthmover
equipment
US$5.1B
84%
Figure 3: Large haultruck tyres as a percentage of the EM tyre market – 2005 sales
5.1 EM tyre manufacturers & distributors
5.1.1 Established manufacturers
Until early 2004, three tyre companies – Michelin, Bridgestone and Goodyear (the Big-3) –
comprised 95% of the medium-to-large8 haultruck sector. That figure has now reduced
significantly with the emergence9 of newcomer manufacturers from (mainly) China, Europe,
India and Malaysia. The mainstream products of the Big-3 are of radial ply construction
which is more technologically advanced – providing higher tyre life and lower operating cost
per hour – than bias ply construction.
7
Haultrucks of 140mt payload and larger.
Haultrucks of 90mt payload and larger.
9
Some of these manufacturers have been making EM tyres for many years; however they have become widely
available globally only during the current supply crisis.
8
7
OTRACO
Appendix 1 provides information on EM tyre manufacturers, including tyre brands, sizes and
constructions available from the major manufacturers.
Prior to the late 1990s Bridgestone had the lion’s share of the large haultruck market. The
release, at that time, by Michelin of its XDR – a deeper tread (E4+) – specification tyre gave
Michelin the lead in terms of tyre life performance. This, together with the opening of their
second giant tyre manufacturing plant at Lexington in the USA saw Michelin grabbing
additional market share. The trend continued with the introduction of ultra-class trucks, with
Michelin being the life-performance and market leader in the 63” tyre size from the outset;
although Bridgestone have now substantially narrowed this gap.
The availability of Bridgestone’s VRDP (E4+) specification four years ago has seen
Michelin and Bridgestone running neck and neck life performance wise, with almost equal
dollar share of the haultruck tyre market. Goodyear remains approximately half the size of
either in terms of haultruck tyre sales. Goodyear has also developed an E4+ specification but
only to the 37.00R57 size (to suit 190mt haultrucks), not for the 40.00R57 size (to suit 220mt
trucks) which is the largest haultruck size that Goodyear produces. Goodyear’s two-piece
45R57 tyre (equivalent to the traditional one-piece 40.00R57 size), developed several years
ago, has not gained widespread acceptance. Otraco believes that there have been three main
reasons for this: its pricing was initially (and remains) too high; Goodyear has not devoted
sufficient resources to resolve development issues, and supply has been limited and irregular.
Only Michelin and Bridgestone10 produce tyres for the very biggest haultrucks – ultra-class
trucks of 270mt capacity and larger. Ultra-class tyres range in size from 50/90R57 to
59/80R63 – the largest haultruck tyre currently available.
Second tier established manufacturers are Toyo and Yokohama, with the largest sizes
produced being restricted to 37.00R57 radial ply and 40.00-57 bias ply, respectively. Third
tier established manufacturers are General, who produce mainly bias ply tyres (up to the
33.00-51 size) and Pirelli who produce up to the 24.00-35 size.
5.1.2 Newcomer manufacturers
The major change seen in the supply side for EM tyres since early 2004 has been the
dramatic increase in the number of new manufacturers and in the global distribution of nontraditional brands.
Belshina, a Belarus manufactured brand, has been producing 40.00-57 bias ply tyres since
the 1980s. They made some sales into western markets (mainly North America) from the
mid-1990s but never gained significant acceptance. However there would not be a major
mine globally who has not now heard of (and at least considered purchasing) Belshina tyres
over the past three years.
Similarly there are a number of Chinese brands that have been manufactured in medium to
large haultruck tyre sizes for a decade or more – but which have been sold almost
exclusively to mines in China and other Asian countries. These include Ax, Henan, Tianli,
Torch, Triangle and Tutric.
10
It appears increasingly unlikely that Goodyear will commit to ultra-class tyre production.
8
OTRACO
EuroTire is a new brand but not without heritage. It is manufactured in the Ukrainian factory
that was once the design centre for Belshina tyres – although there is now no commercial
affiliation between the two brands.
Ceat and MRF are Indian manufacturers of tyres ranging in size to 18.00-33, and Simex
(with 51% equity by Continental) makes tyres of up to the 33.00-51 size in Malaysia.
In all, Otraco has identified more than 50 newcomer manufacturers (producing 70 different
brands of EM tyre) – with at least one factory in each of Belarus, Ukraine, Malaysia, Italy,
Romania, South Africa and South Korea, two factories in India and the rest in China.
However the product of all of these factories, at least in the larger haultruck tyre sizes, is
almost exclusively of bias ply construction – as opposed to radial ply construction used by
Michelin, Bridgestone and Goodyear for their mainstream haultruck tyre production – and is
limited to a maximum size of 40.00-57. The largest radial tyre produced in a newcomer
brand is currently 33.00R51, although radials of up to 40.00R57 will become available later
this year. There are no plans, as far as Otraco is aware, for the production of 63” tyres (bias
ply or radial) by any newcomer manufacturer within the next two years.
Otraco recently compiled a questionnaire and sent it to each of the newcomer manufacturers
and distributors that we have been able to identify and obtain email contact details for.
Appendix 2 contains the completed questionnaires of all the manufacturers and distributors
who responded; these provide information on tyre brands and sizes and, in some cases,
production quantities, and plans for the future production of new sizes and radial
specifications.
5.1.2.1 Tyre life performance, operational and safety issues
There are three factors affecting the life performance of newcomer brands tyres. The first is
that the majority of these tyres at present are of bias ply construction which has a maximum
tyre life potential typically only 70% of that of radial tyres. The second is that many
newcomer brand tyres are still in the development phase (it generally takes two to three years
to iron out most of the design/manufacture problems with a new specification bias ply tyre),
so premature failure will tend to be more prevalent than for mature specification tyres. A
third factor is that quality control for some of these newcomer brands is not going to match
that of the established manufacturers.
The potential consequences are low tyre life, operational constraints and safety issues. Many
newcomer brand bias ply tyres are averaging only 10% of the life of Big-3 radial tyres –
mainly due to inadequate manufacturing quality, technical expertise and/or product
development time.
If a mine has a supply shortfall of say 10 established brand tyres for the year, and can only
replace these through the supply of newcomer brand tyres, then it may need 100 of these
tyres to provide equivalent budgeted operating hours (or kilometres).
Bias ply tyres do not have the load and TKPH rating of equivalent compound radial tyres.
Therefore load and speed control is generally more critical with bias ply tyre operation to
minimise the incident of low-life heat related failures.
9
OTRACO
Reports of near new tyre blowouts11, often on haultruck front positions and without any
indication of rock damage or other operational factors, are becoming increasingly common.
Unless there is reasonable confidence in the manufacturing integrity of newcomer brand
tyres we recommend that they be fitted to the rear axles of trucks, loaders and dozers.
5.1.2.2 Maintenance issues
Bias ply tyres are more difficult to dismount from rims because they have a substantially
wider bead foot than radial tyres. Whereas radial tyres can usually be dismounted without the
need for an EM tyre press, one may be required for bias ply tyres, creating additional cost12
and logistical issues.
Bias ply tyres do not tend to retain inflation pressure as well as radial tyres because there is
more bead movement, and hence potential for air loss at tyre/rim interface, with bias ply
tyres. Pressure maintenance checks and pump-ups may therefore have to been conducted
more frequently on bias ply tyres.
Radial tyres are far more amenable to successful sidewall repairs than bias ply tyres. So if
sidewall damage is a problem on site then this needs to be given consideration.
5.1.2.3 Supply chain and related issues
Purchasing tyres from non-traditional sources, whether they are manufacturers or
distributors, can bring associated challenges such as pricing, warranty and reliability of
delivery issues. There are also reports of counterfeit tyres – the most recent being a Chinese
manufacturer stamping his tyres with the brand name of local competitor.
5.1.2.4 General
Buyers need to be cognisant of the potential issues discussed above when purchasing
newcomer brand tyres, especially if these brands are going to comprise a substantial
proportion of the buyer’s tyre usage requirement.
5.1.3 Tyre distributors
Third party distributors currently play a much greater role in tyre supply than they did
several years ago. The majority of the newly emerged distributors are selling newcomer
brand and/or second hand tyres. Many sell established brand tyres as well; some are
authorised agents for tyre manufacturers and others are middle-man distributors.
Appendix 1 provides information on some distributors for newcomer brand EM tyres.
There are a lot of dynamics in the tyre distribution sector, with new distributors still entering
the market on a daily basis, prices being amended to reflect the change in supply and demand
interaction over time, and distributors varying their product mix to suit prevailing market
factors. For example there is a large number of reportedly good-condition, half-worn ultraclass (63”) haultruck tyres being offered for sale at present. Rumour has it that some of these
tyres are being removed early by end users with the sale proceeds funding new tyre
purchases. If this is so, then we predict quick intervention by the sole two manufacturers of
this tyre size range, Michelin and Bridgestone.
11
12
Blowouts are also termed as tyre bursts or impacts.
A large EM tyre press could cost US$150,000 or more to purchase and install.
10
OTRACO
5.2 EM tyre factories
5.2.1 Large haultruck radial tyre factories
There are only five EM tyre factories, worldwide, that produce radial tyres for large
haultrucks13 (refer Figure 4).
Michelin
Vitoria factory,
Spain
Goodyear/Toyo
Nippon Giant
factory, Tatsuno,
Japan
Bridgestone
Shimonoseki
factory, Japan
Goodyear
Topeka factory,
Kansas, USA
Michelin
Lexington
factory, South
Carolina, USA
up to 59/80R63 size
up to 40.00R57 size
up to 37.00R57 size
Figure 4: EM radial tyre plants for large haultrucks
These five factories are:
• Bridgestone’s Shimonoseki plant in Japan
• Michelin’s Vitoria plant in Spain
• Michelin’s Lexington plant in USA
• Goodyear’s Topeka plant in USA
• Goodyear and Toyo’s14 Tatsuno plant in Japan.
Of these, only four factories produce the most widely used15 large EM tyre size – 40.00R57 –
that is run on 220mt16 haultrucks; the Tatsuno plant makes tyres only up to the 37.00R57
(190mt17) size. Only three, the Bridgestone and two Michelin factories, produce 57” and 63”
tyres for ultra-class haultrucks. All five plants also make radial (and in some cases bias ply)
tyres for large loaders and auxiliary mining equipment.
5.2.2 Other EM tyre factories
Yokohama and Belshina have been making bias ply large haultruck and loader tyres of up to
the 40.00-57 size for 220mt capacity haultrucks for decades at their Onomichi Japan and
Bobruisk Belarus plants, respectively. Bridgestone/Firestone has a factory in Bloomington
13
Excluding Belshina which now makes a 33.00R51 radial tyre, and several companies (including the
EuroTire, Ax, Torch, BIW-TZ and Resource brands) are planning to produce 40.00R57 radial tyres in 2007/08.
14
This is the Nippon Giant Tire joint venture among Goodyear (65%), Toyo (30%) and Mitsubishi.
15
In dollar terms, not necessarily in quantity.
16
240 short ton.
17
210 short ton.
11
OTRACO
USA that produces tyres of up to the 70/70-57 size (the world’s biggest tyre18) for 73mt
capacity loaders.
Apart from these well established factories, there has been a proliferation of new and or
expanded factories that manufacture bias ply tyres for large haultrucks and loaders – notably
in China (approximately 25 plants) and Ukraine (one plant).
For smaller EM tyre sizes the number of factories worldwide exceeds 70, including the Big-3
manufacturer’s facilities in Japan, Brazil, Luxembourg and USA; most of the rest are located
in China, with the remainder in India, Malaysia, Italy, Turkey, Romania, South Africa, South
Korea and elsewhere.
6.
Global economic growth
The catalyst for increasing EM tyre demand and prices at present is the expanding global
economy. China has accounted for about one-third of the growth in the world economy over
the past six years. The country’s seemingly insatiable demand for raw materials has reshaped
the commodities market and created a boon for the mining industry.
There has been much debate as to how long this growth will continue and whether the
“bubble will burst”. What is almost certain is that growth will be sustained until at least after
the Beijing Olympics in August 2008, and that while it may reduce substantially postOlympics, it is likely (although not certain) that Chinese aspirations will maintain a level of
demand for mining product that is significantly higher than pre-2003 levels.
6.1 Mine product demand and prices
China’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been growing at more than 10% annually for the
past decade. It has created enormous demand for consumer and construction raw materials as
well as energy products.
Figure 5 shows the effect that this growth in demand has had on mine commodity prices. The
chart assumes a price base index of 100 in 2001 for six mine products: iron ore, gold, coal,
nickel, aluminium and copper. Apart from nickel, and to a lesser extent gold, prices remained
relatively constant through to 2003. Since then, price increases from the 2001 base have
ranged from a 100% increase for aluminium, to a 300% increase for copper, to a 600%
increase for nickel.
18
The 70/70-57 tyre (designed for the LeTourneau L-2350 front end loader) is 3.73m diameter by 1.73m width
and weighs 6,800 kg. The 59/80R57 (designed for the Caterpillar 797B haultruck and suitable for the Liebherr
T282B and Terex MT6300 haultrucks) has a larger diameter, 4.03m, but a width of only 1.48m and a weight of
5,300 kg.
12
OTRACO
Commodity Price Indices 2001-2007 (2001 base of 100)
700
600
500
Iron Ore
Gold
Coal
Nickel
Aluminium
Copper
START
OF EM
TYRE
SUPPLY
CRISIS
400
300
200
100
0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Jan-Mar07
Figure 5: Commodity price growth 2001 to Mar 2007
6.2 Shipping consequences
The Chinese boon to the mining industry also produced a logistical nightmare for the
shipping of ores and concentrates, and getting materials and equipment to build and operate
new mines. Sea-freight demand increased dramatically in 2003 and reached record levels
during August 2005 to January 2006, leading to increases in both shipping rates and delays.
Logistical efficiency was the shipping industry’s biggest stumbling block; the focus over the
past three years has been to expand shipping terminal hours, hire more stevedores, and
improve in-terminal efficiency – mainly through increased electronic processing of cargos19.
Many new port facilities have been built and previous facilities enlarged, especially in China.
China has also built dozens of new shipyards, including the world’s largest in Shanghai, to
supplement the main freighter producing shipyards in Japan and Korea.
Generally, the global shipping situation is now much improved compared with 2004 and
2005, although port infrastructure for the export of mine product remains a major problem in
some regions – the Australian Bowen Basin and Hunter Valley coal mining ports being
notable examples.
7.
Demand for EM tyres
The increased demand for mining products and commodity price rises since late 2003 have
led to an expansion of existing mines, reopening of closed mines, and the development of
19
The conversion from manual to electronic processing, voluntary in the past, is now becoming mandatory in
many countries
13
OTRACO
new mines. Mine production has increased through improved productivity of existing mining
equipment and the purchase of new loaders and trucks to expand mine fleets and to equip
new mines.
Increased mine production has placed pressure on the supply of all service related
commodities – including original equipment (OE) tyres for the new mining equipment and
replacement tyres for existing machines. The equipment most needed to generate increased
mine production are loaders and haultrucks, and hence it is for loader and haultruck tyres that
demand has increased so dramatically over the past three years, especially in the larger sizes
– for loaders of 33mt and larger bucket capacity and for haultrucks of 140mt and larger
payload capacity.
7.1 Mining equipment production
Mining equipment manufacturers are enjoying record sales at present for all classes of
mining equipment. The biggest in terms of revenue, and in terms of its influence on EM tyre
demand, is for medium to large haultrucks.
Global sales of haultrucks20 of 90mt capacity and larger increased from a figure of well
under a 1,000 units in 2003 to more than 1,110 units in 2004, to almost 1,700 units in 2005
and approximately 1,800 units in 200621. The current year is expected to see another record
output – the equivalent to providing 13 new fully operational Escondida, Freeport or
Bingham Canyon mines. There is also a trend towards larger, particularly ultra-class,
haultrucks. Most of these sales have added to rather than replaced the existing global truck
population.
7.2 Haultruck tyre demand
Each new haultruck requires six tyres before it is commissioned22 and another six
replacement tyres typically before it has completed its first year of operation, with six more
being required, typically, every eight to 10 months. That translated to 10,800 tyres of
27.00x49 size or larger required for new haultruck sales in 2007 and an additional 13,500
replacement tyres being required in 2008 just to service the new trucks sold during 2007.
At the current rate of mining equipment sales, global tyre requirements are increasing by
8.5% annually. Otraco estimates that the 2008 global tyre requirement23 for haultrucks of
90mt capacity and larger will exceed 115,000 tyres.
8.
Supply of EM tyres
The primary limiting factor affecting tyre production volume remains factory output
capacity, not raw material supply – although raw material prices have increased substantially
over the past five years.
20
From Western mining equipment manufacturers.
Source: Mr Peter Gilewicz of The Parker Bay Company.
22
Original equipment manufacturer (OEM) demands for original equipment (OE) tyres can no longer be met by
the established tyre manufacturers. Most buyers now purchase new mining equipment without tyres and
provide the tyres from their own site stocks.
23
This figure includes original equipment and replacement tyres.
21
14
OTRACO
8.1 Raw material supply
The main raw materials used in EM tyre production are natural rubber, synthetic rubber,
carbon black, steel and processing chemicals. For a large radial haultruck tyre the
approximate proportion of these raw materials, by weight, is as shown in Table 1.
Material
Natural rubber
Synthetic rubber
Steel wire
Carbon black
Other (processing chemicals, etc)
Proportion by weight
35%
25%
20%
10%
10%
Table 1: Proportion of material by weight in a large radial haultruck tyre
Rubber is the main component of a tyre and approximately 90% of global natural rubber
annual production is used for tyre manufacture. The three main sources of natural rubber, are
Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia. The major sources of synthetic rubber are USA, Japan
and China.24
General world demand for many of the raw materials used in tyres (eg. rubber, oil and steel)
has risen substantially since 2002. Once again China has played a major role. Apart from its
enormously increased use of steel since 2001, it became the world’s largest consumer of
natural rubber in that year and the largest overall rubber user (combined consumption of
natural and synthetic rubber) the following year.
In spite of these developments there appears to be no substantial concern from the three
major EM tyre producers (Michelin, Bridgestone and Goodyear) that there will be any
significant problems sourcing materials for tyre production, at least in the short term.
However, the increased demand for tyre raw materials has lead to hefty price rises for these
materials and has created considerable additional pressure for higher tyre prices. This is
discussed in detail in section 9.
8.2 Tyre production expansion
A general rule of thumb for EM tyre manufacturing facilities is that it takes two years to
expand or build a factory, and five years to get a return on capital. A single segmented
mould, used to contain and shape a tyre during the vulcanising stage of manufacture, may
cost as much as US$3 million and yet process just one tyre per day. EM tyre manufacturers,
at least the Big-3, will not make this investment commitment lightly. This, reinforced by
memories of what happened to EM tyre manufacturing sector profitability following the push
by mining corporations for global purchasing programs in the late-1990s is the major reason
for EM tyre supply having trailed demand for this product over the past three years.
During the two years prior to June 2004 tyre companies invested US$2.8 billion in new and
expanded tyre manufacturing facilities worldwide. However, almost none of this expansion
investment was associated with large EM tyres – it was for light vehicle tyre plants and, to a
lesser extent, to factories producing small EM tyres.
24
Global demand for rubber by all users (not solely for tyres) is in the order of 40% for natural rubber and 60%
for synthetic rubber.
15
OTRACO
A very significant reason for tyre companies channelling the majority of their investment
funding into small tyre production at that time was because their profit margins were very
much higher in that segment of the market compared with the EM tyre segment.
Prior to mid-2004 the last major expansion of facilities producing large EM tyres, apart from
the opening of Michelin’s Lexington factory in 1998, was during the 1999 to 2002 period by
Michelin (at its Lexington and Vitoria plants) and Bridgestone (at its Shimonoseki facility)
to allow production of 63” tyres for the new ultra-class haultrucks being introduced at that
time. Both Michelin and Bridgestone continued to make modest increases in production
capacity to meet increased demand for 63” tyres. Goodyear’s only expansion in relation to
large EM tyres had been the expansion of their facility in Topeka in 2003 to produce the new
two-piece 45R57 tyre for 220mt haultrucks.
Details of recent tyre company production increases, since June 2004, and planned future
expansion are discussed in the following sections.
8.2.1 Tyre production increases to date
Bridgestone completed a significant expansion of its Japanese Hofu plant in late 2006 almost
doubling the output of small EM tyres (up to 21.00R35). To date there has been only
marginal production expansion by Bridgestone and Michelin for larger tyre sizes – most has
been through the installation of additional tyre curing presses – at Shimonoseki Japan in the
case of Bridgestone, and at Lexington USA and Vitoria Spain for Michelin – to bring these
factories up to maximum production capacity. Almost all of this extra capacity has been for
the 63” and 57” sizes.
Goodyear has made no investment in additional large EM tyre output apart from
improvement in factory efficiencies during 2004. The same applies for the second and third
tier established manufacturers – Toyo, Yokohama, General and Pirelli.
Virtually all other expansion in production in EM tyre sizes up to the 51” size (ie. to 36.0051), and a substantial proportion of the increase in 57” (mainly 40.00-57) output can be
attributed to the newcomer manufacturers, mainly in China and Eastern Europe.
8.2.2 Planned tyre production increases
Michelin has a major new EM factory coming on line at Campo Grande in Brazil in late
2007 that will have an initial output of 40,000 tonnes per annum producing 25” to 49”
tyres25. It has also committed to a 50%26 increase in output from its Lexington USA plant –
mainly benefiting 63” production, with some increase in 57” output but minimal for 51” (and
other) sizes. This additional production is planned to begin in mid-2008.
Bridgestone has announced a 20% increase in output from Shimonoseki from mid-2008.
This will benefit mainly 63” production, but also that for 33”, 49”, 51” and 57” sizes. In
January this year, Bridgestone committed to a new large/ultra large EM tyre factory near to
its existing Shimonoseki plant. This will be Bridgestone’s first new tyre factory in Japan in
more than 30 years. Plans are for construction to begin in late 2007 with production
commencing in the second half of 2009, and full output of 11,000 tonnes per annum by the
25
This will be give Michelin five plants globally for the production of EM tyre sizes up to 49”, in addition to
the two plants (Vitoria and Lexington) producing 51”, 57” and 63” tyres.
26
Output from tyre factories is typically measured in terms of rubber consumption – not in the physical number
of tyres. The 50% expansion figure is based on Lexington’s June 2006 output level.
16
OTRACO
second half of 2010. Bridgestone will allow for expansion of this facility should the need
arise in the future. The 11,000 tonnes annual capacity (by late 2010) of this new factory
represents approximately 20% of Shimonoseki plant capacity as at mid-2006.
Michelin is also considering several new EM tyre production projects which are all currently
subject to approval and finance. They include future expansion of both Lexington and
Vitoria and of the new Campo Grande plant. None of these potential tyre production
increases have been included in Otraco’s model results presented in Appendix 3, nor in the
chart depicted in Figure 7.
Goodyear has made no announcements, nor do we expect it to do so, in relation to future
expanded output for its EM tyre range. Toyo has also been quiet on the subject as have
General and Pirelli.
Yokohama is expanding its Japanese Onomichi factory – the expansion commenced in
November 2006 with planned completion in 2009 – providing almost 50% increase in
production from 13,200 to 19,500 tonnes per annum, mainly in the 25”, 33” and 35” radial
specifications.
Belshina, in Belarus, has announced plans to produce radial tyres by the end of 2009 in the
following sizes: 21.00R35, 24.00R35, 27.00R49, 33.00R51 and 36.00R51. They have made
no announcement on 40.00R57 radial tyre production.
EuroTire, in Ukraine, plans to produce 40.00R57 radials by March 2008 at a rate of 4,800
tyres per annum.
Magna, Chinese made with Netherlands design input, plans to produce 27.00R49, 33.00R51
and 40.00R57 radials in quantities of 1,200 tyres per annum in each size. Timing has not
been announced.
Pingan-Hiflex, Chinese made with Australian input, plan to produce a 40.00-57 bias ply tyre
by mid-2007.
Shifeng Double Star/Ax, in China, will introduce a range of haultruck radial tyre sizes from
27.00R49 to 40.00R57 by November 2007.
Guilin/Torch, in China, plans to be producing 40.00R57 tyres by the end of this year.
Qingdoa Taifa/BIW-TZ, in China, will be making 37.00R57 and 40.00R57 radials by
November 2007.
XTIRE/Ziggurat, in China, plans to manufacture 57” and 63” tyres, although no timing has
been stipulated.
Resource, in China, intends making radial tyres ranging from 24.00R35 to 40.00R57 by
2009.
Apart from XTIRE/Ziggurat, no company has announced plans to manufacture 63” ultraclass haultruck tyres – a size range duopolised at present by Michelin and Bridgestone, and
produced by them in radial construction only.
17
OTRACO
9.
Supply/demand interaction for EM tyres
Demand for EM tyres is exceedingly flexible while the supply side is quite inelastic. The
current increased demand for EM tyres, in the absence of an equivalent rise in tyre
production, has manifested itself in two major ways:
1. Tyre supply shortage, and
2. Tyre price increase.
9.1 EM tyre shortages
The last time that severe EM tyre shortages were experienced, in the mid-1990s, haultrucks
had to be parked up on blocks on some minesites. The opening of Michelin’s USA
Lexington plant in 1998 eased the supply situation at that time.
The current situation has greatly surpassed the severity level of the mid-1990s. Following the
release of our June 2004 report Otraco undertook investigations to predict the likely scenario
of EM tyre supply and demand for the coming years. The result was the chart shown in
Figure 6.
Haultruck Tyres 49" to 63"
Otraco's
projections in
Apr 2005
What could be
achieved through
industry-wide 25% tire
life improvement
What will be the
state of the
industry here?
Factory inefficiences
eliminated & Supplier
stocks run down
Factory marginal
production
increases
Chinese demand
driven increase in
mining rates &
equipment fleets
Jan 2003
Jan 2004
Jan 2005
Tire Supply
Jan 2006
Unchecked Demand
Jan 2007
Jan 2008
Jan 2009
Modified Demand
Figure 6: Otraco’s April 2005 qualitative estimate of EM tyre supply and demand
9.1.1 Otraco model of EM tyre supply & demand
Since then, Otraco has developed a supply and demand model for medium to large haultruck
tyres (ranging in size from 27.00x49 to 59/80x63) into which we factor haultruck annual
production, from which original equipment and replacement tyre demand can be modelled,
and tyre factory existing and future expansion production figures which allow us to model
EM tyre supply.
The results of this model, together the assumptions upon which the model is based and tyre
factory expansion information, is contained in Appendix 3. A chart approximating the
interaction between supply and demand and highlighting the main supply-side influences is
depicted in Figure 727.
27
In Figure 7, MI represents Michelin and BS represents Bridgestone.
18
OTRACO
Haultruck Tyres 49" to 63"
11,000
We are
HERE
MI: approx 50%* increased
output from Lexington USA
plant (51", 57" & 63")
Tyres per Month
10,000
Chinese & European
manufacturers: ongoing
increased output
9,000
BS: approx 20%* increased output
from Shimonoseki Japan plant
(49", 51", 57" & 63")
BS: New Japanese
plant commences
production; approx
20%** increased output
for giant sizes (49",
51", 57" & 63")
8,000
MI: New Brazil plant
output (to 49")
7,000
MI & BS: 5 new giant curing
presses; extra 1 to 3
tyres/day/press (63" & 57")
6,000
Jan 2006
Jan 2007
Jan 2008
* Compared with mid-2006 production from this plant
** Compared with mid-2006 production from this company
Jan 2009
Global Tyre Supply
Jan 2010
Jan 2011
Global Tyre Demand
Figure 7: Otraco’s April 2007 quantitative28 estimate of EM tyre supply and demand
The results shown in Figure 7 and in Appendix 3 could vary significantly if Otraco’s
assumptions do not reflect real-world developments – particularly in relation to haultruck
sales from 2007 to 201029 and additional tyre output that we have based on tyre company
announcements (refer Appendix 3B for details).
9.2 EM tyre pricing pressures
We have seen the free market supply and demand mechanisms holding sway over the past
three years. The current situation of higher demand for EM tyres, without an equivalent
increase in supply, has driven up tyre prices (just as these same mechanisms, working in the
opposite direction, were associated with the dramatic reduction in EM tyre prices in the late
1990s). The simultaneous substantial rises in raw material prices have fuelled this tyre price
inflationary pressure.
9.2.1 Manufacturing input costs
The cost of a tyre ex-works is determined by three manufacturing inputs: raw material costs,
conversion costs and services and administration costs. Table 2 shows the approximate
weighting of each of these three manufacturing inputs30 in the ex-works cost of a large radial
haultruck tyre – before the addition of the profit component to set the ex-works price of the
tyre.
Manufacturing input
Raw material costs
Conversion costs
Services and administration costs
Cost weighting (Apr 2001)
40%
40%
20%
Table 2: EM tyre manufacturing inputs weighting in ex-works cost (excluding profit)
28
Based on Otraco’s global EM tyre production and usage model and the assumptions that we have input to this
model – refer Appendix 3. Note that this chart does not include allowance for the additional production
expansions being considered by Michelin as discussed in section 8.2.2.
29
Otraco has assumed that haultruck global sales will remain at the 2006 level (approximately 1,800 trucks)
for each of 2007 and 2008 and then reduce to 1,200 trucks in 2009 and 800 trucks in 2010.
30
Otraco has reviewed these input cost weightings, published in our June 2004 tyre market status report, and
believes they are representative of current EM tyre manufacturing costs. We estimate raw material costs to
comprise 35-40% of the ex-works cost (excluding any profit component) of an EM radial tyre (Michelin has
quoted a figure as high as 46%).
19
OTRACO
9.2.1.1 Freight and import duty
Apart from excluding any profit component, the manufacturing inputs shown in Table 2 also
do not take account of any freight, handling or import duty costs associated with transporting
the tyre from the factory to its place of use. Freight and handling costs may add as much as
15%, or more, to the ex-works tyre price.
Import duty usually depends on the agreement between the country of export and the country
of import. For example tyres originating from the USA or Spain have received a concession
of 6 percentage points in Chilean import duty, benefiting Michelin, and USA made
Goodyear tyres over Bridgestone Japanese made tyres. Several countries have recently
negotiated, or are in the process of negotiating, a free trade agreement with China which will
give a pricing advantage to EM tyres being imported from any of the newcomer Chinese
manufacturers.
9.2.1.2 Raw material costs
The increased demand for raw materials used in tyre manufacture has led to sharp rises in the
price of these materials over the past two years. The price of natural rubber in 2006 reached
almost US$2.50/kg far surpassing its 1995 peak of US$1.50/kg, after having fallen to less
than US$0.60/kg during the intervening years (refer Appendix 4).
EM Tyre Raw Material Cost
200
180
160
Raw material cost index
140
Dec 1996 base total raw
material cost index of 100
120
Natural Rubber
Synthetic Rubber
Carbon Black
Steel
Other
100
80
Total Raw Materials
60
40
20
7
6
M
ar
0
5
M
ar
0
4
M
ar
0
3
M
ar
0
2
M
ar
0
1
M
ar
0
0
M
ar
0
9
M
ar
0
8
M
ar
9
7
M
ar
9
6
M
ar
9
5
M
ar
9
4
M
ar
9
3
M
ar
9
2
M
ar
9
1
ar
9
M
ar
9
M
M
ar
9
0
0
Figure 8: EM tyre raw material input cost index – Mar 1990 to Mar 2007
Figure 8 shows the influence of individual raw material prices on the overall weighted
average cost of raw materials31 used to make a large radial haultruck tyre (eg. a 40.00R57
tyre as used on 220mt haultrucks) for the period from March 1990 to March 2007.
31
Data used to produce the graph in Figure 8 is based on US Department of Labor commodity price indices –
all based on US dollar prices (with no adjustment for the value of money over time nor for seasonal influences).
Tyre raw material composition by weight, used to calculate the relative weighting of individual materials on the
20
OTRACO
Since June 2004 natural rubber has increased in price by 78%, carbon black by 32%,
synthetic rubber and steel by 26% and other processing chemicals used in the manufacture of
tyres by 37%. Overall, the weighted average price of raw materials needed to produce EM
tyres has increased by almost 50%.
About 40% of an EM radial tyre’s weight is composed of petroleum based products – the
two main ones being synthetic rubber and carbon black. While the price of carbon black has
reflected the oil price over the past three years, there has not been a strong correlation
between the price of oil and that of synthetic rubber (refer Appendix 4); nevertheless if the
price of oil continues to rise then this will put additional pressure on tyre pricing.
9.2.1.3 Material price and substitution
Several points are evident from Figure 8. Natural rubber has had the greatest influence on
combined raw material costs – partly because of its relatively high price by weight and partly
because it is the major single ingredient of a haultruck tyre. It has also exhibited by far the
most volatile pricing of the five raw material groups.
As the price of synthetic rubber has not increased in line with natural rubber prices (refer
Appendix 4), one may think that there would be considerable temptation, in order to keep
manufacturing costs down, to substitute synthetic rubber for natural rubber. In fact, the bull
run of natural rubber prices over the past five years, in contrast to the general stability of
synthetic rubber prices, has not been accompanied by any substantial increase in demand for
synthetic rubber at the expense of natural rubber. This is because the two rubber types have
very distinct properties.
Natural rubber has advantages in relation to heat build-up, mechanical properties, green (precured) tackiness and strength, and cure rate; however it is more susceptible to aging and oil
damage and reversion during vulcanisation, and is more permeable to air. The main use for
natural rubber is in the production of tyres, particularly haultruck tyres where heat resistance
is of far greater importance than for most other tyre product groups – such as passenger,
commercial, aircraft, etc. Some limited substitution of synthetic for natural rubber is possible
for non-earthmover tyres, although with a resultant trade-off in product quality. However the
scope for substitution is, at present, almost non-existent in the manufacture of EM tyres.
9.2.1.4 EM tyre manufacturing cost model
The graph in Figure 9 is based on an EM tyre manufacturing cost model developed by
Otraco.
Figure 9 depicts, on a monthly basis for the period March 1990 to March 2007, the combined
effects of raw material, conversion and services/administration input costs32 on the ex-works
cost index of a large radial haultruck tyre produced in the USA. All input costs are based on
US dollars33.
final tyre material cost in Figure 8, is as shown in Table 1 and was based on figures provided by Goodyear and
Michelin.
32
The graph of Figure 9 is based on the input cost weightings shown in Table 2 being applicable as at March
2007. These cost weightings may vary over time as one input cost (eg. raw materials, presently) assumes a
greater relative weighting over another.
33
In the case of raw materials, these costs have not been adjusted for the value of money nor for seasonal
influences
21
OTRACO
EM Tyre Input Costs
180
160
140
Dec 1996 base total
input cost index of 100
Input Cost Index
120
Raw Materials
100
Conversion
Other
80
Total Inputs
60
40
20
0
Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Figure 9: EM tyre manufacturing inputs cost index – Mar 1990 to Mar 2007
Conversion and services/administration costs are assumed to vary over time in line with the
US consumer price index34. A base index of 100 has been set for the ex-works cost at
December 1996, which was prior to the development of EM tyre global purchasing
agreements that are now widely used by large mining companies.
Figure 9 shows that raw material costs, together with conversion costs, are the main tyre
manufacturing cost factors. The volatility of natural rubber prices (refer Figure 8) is clearly
evidenced in the final ex-works tyre cost.
Similar graphs could be developed for Japanese and Spanish manufactured tyres (and for
newcomer brand tyres being manufactured in China, Belarus, Ukraine, India and Malaysia).
The raw material costs and their variation over time should be almost identical to the figures
we have used for the USA made tyres. There may be some differences in the case of
conversion and services/administration costs; however we consider that the overall picture
would be similar for tyres produced in all these countries.
9.2.2 Ex-works cost versus onsite tyre price
Figure 10 compares the indicative historical US dollar price of a Big-3 manufactured and
distributed 40.00R57 tyre versus the ex-works (USA) cost index for such a tyre, for the
period March 1990 to March 2007.
The tyre price variations shown in this graph for the past 17 years are indicative only.
Absolute tyre price and the magnitude and timing of price changes will have varied
34
US city average – all items with no seasonal adjustment.
22
OTRACO
considerably from mine to mine depending on a multitude of factors such as mine purchasing
clout, supply agreement periods, exchange rates, freight charges, import duties and the like.
Mines that have not had the benefit of a purchase agreement with one of the traditional
established tyre manufacturers, and who have had to purchase tyres from one of the
newcomer manufacturers, or from a third party distributor, may be paying prices
significantly higher (several times higher in the worst cases) than that shown in Figure 10.
The current price of a 40.00R57 tyre purchased from one of the Big-3 manufacturers under a
supply agreement is similar to that for the same tyre purchased in 1996 prior to the
introduction of global purchasing contracts initiated by the major mining corporations. Over
the intervening years tyre prices initially dropped substantially due to global agreement terms
and conditions dictated by the mining companies. In 1999, when EM tyre supply capacity
greatly exceeded demand, some mining corporations obtained tyre price cuts in the order of
15-20%. However, since 2004 the dramatic increase in tyre demand has pushed prices past
those previous levels.
EM Tyre Price vs. Input Cost
$20,000
200
$18,000
180
$16,000
160
$14,000
140
Tyre Price $US
$12,000
Tyre profit potential
$10,000
100
$8,000
$6,000
$4,000
120
80
Dec 1996
base input
cost index of
100
60
Tyre input cost index
40.00R57 price (US$)
Input Cost Index
40
20
$2,000
$0
0
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Figure 10: 40.00R57 tyre price vs. ex-works cost index – Mar 1990 to Mar 2007
What is clear from Figure 10 is that while tyre manufacturers have clawed back tyre prices,
the hefty rise in raw material and other input costs means that the EM tyre manufacturing
sector has still not returned to the profit level that it enjoyed in the early-1990s.
What is also obvious is that the traditional established EM tyre manufacturers have exhibited
notable responsibility and restraint in the face of profit gouging by some of the new
manufacturers and many third party distributors.
23
OTRACO
9.2.3 EM tyre supply contracts & pricing
The preference of the majority of the established manufacturers is to have long term supply
agreements with established mining companies, in which the buyers commit to minimum
purchase quantities, and where tyre pricing reflects changes in tyre cost inputs – particularly
raw materials and production costs.
It has taken a while, but three of the established manufacturers – Michelin, Bridgestone and
Yokohama – have now committed, or are in the process of committing, substantial
investment funds to expanded output of EM tyres. A system of guaranteed sales and fair
pricing will provide a lower risk environment for tyre manufacturers that should benefit the
mining industry.
10. Conclusions
10.1 EM tyre shortages and manufacturers
The enormous increase in demand for EM tyre since early 2004 has generated a myriad of
new manufacturers – most of them Chinese. It has also generated a market for second hand
tyres and created a large number of new distributors selling new and used tyres.
Notwithstanding this, the increase in tyre production output to date has been insufficient to
meet demand.
Raw material supply has not been a factor, nor is it likely to become one, in limiting tyre
supply. Insufficient expansion of tyre production capacity has been the cause for the shortfall
in tyre supply compared with tyre demand since 2004.
Otraco believes that the tyre shortage situation for large EM tyres will become more severe
later this year and into 2008 before easing in late 200835 as significant additional tyre output
from Bridgestone and Michelin comes on line. Depending on what happens in relation to
commodity demand, mining equipment sales, and the further expansion of tyre production
facilities (Michelin’s decision on potential projects currently under consideration could be a
key factor), it is possible that tyre demand will still exceed supply capacity into 2010.
Tyre conservation and supply agreements are critical elements of any plan to weather the
storm, along with mine and fleet optimisation and the search for potential alternatives to the
use of EM tyres. Mining companies who have obtained commitments from suppliers to
provide a quantity of tyres this year similar to what they received last year, and who have
increased average site tyre life through improved tyre management, should be able to
continue, or expand, operations with minimal problems. New mining companies, or those
who do not have adequate supply contracts or who have not made tyre life improvement
inroads on site, may not be in such an enviable position.
What occurs with EM tyre demand in the longer term will depend mainly on the world
economy – largely influenced by China. While world demand for commodities remains high,
commodity prices will be buoyed and, in the absence of a matching level of EM tyre
production, tyre shortages will continue and tyre pricing pressure remain high.
35
The supply situation for smaller EM tyres, up to 27.00R49, should ease in early 2008 following the
completion of Michelin’s Campo Grande plant in Brazil.
24
OTRACO
As supply and demand stabilise we expect that there will be several new key players who
may very likely replace some of the past established manufacturers. However, we should not
underestimate the time it takes to develop and mature an EM tyre specification – a minimum
two to three years for bias ply tyres and three to four years for radial and ultra-class
specifications.
There are big hurdles to entering the EM tyre manufacturing sector and to expanding existing
facilities. They are capital expenditure and the time frame to generate revenue and to achieve
project payback. However these hurdles also make departure difficult when times are lean.
10.2 EM tyre pricing and warranty
All the pressures at present are for an increase in EM tyre pricing. Raw material prices are
rising dramatically, and tyre supply has not, to date, expanded sufficiently to meet the rise in
demand for EM tyres that the industry has experienced over the past three years. It is a
classic supply and demand cycle – one with flexible demand and inflexible supply.
Tyre prices will continue to rise while demand outstrips supply and while raw material prices
continue their upward spiral. A significant number of these new manufacturers and
distributors have also seen the current market situation as one suited to quick profit taking.
The third party market for new and used tyres remains dynamic – the incidence of
ridiculously high pricing tends to be reducing, but now we are seeing an influx of used 63”
tyres being offered for sale and the spectre of counterfeit branding.
Tyre companies have used the same argument (supply versus demand) that has been
successfully used by mining companies against them during the late-1990s, and they have
seen the past three years as an opportunity – not just to recoup their costs, but to claw back
some of the profits they lost towards the end of the 1990s decade.
Some of Otraco’s clients, particularly the larger mining houses that had gained good price
considerations from tyre suppliers during the late 1990s, were apprehensive of being early
casualties as the tyre shortage situation worsened during 2004 – because tyre supplier profit
margins were lower on their minesites compared with those on mines paying considerably
higher tyre prices, and they believed that the tyre suppliers might provide tyres preferentially
to the higher priced sites. However Otraco’s prediction in 2004 that where tyre
manufacturers had worked hard to win higher tyre allocations with their larger clients, they
would not want to risk this for short-term gains, has generally been upheld. Historically, the
bigger (more valuable) customers get looked after first.
Warranty is also a function of price and demand. Warranty claims (and reimbursements)
have virtually disappeared from the scene since 2004. However as supply and demand settle
warranties will again become an important element of tyre management.
11. Recommendations
EM tyre conservation and the maintenance of adequate tyre supply are the two most
important considerations for mining companies, in relation to tyres, at present. Mining
companies should also be investigating mining fleet optimisation in terms of tyres, and
alternatives to equipment or processes that involve the use of EM tyres.
25
OTRACO
Tyre conservation means maximising site average tyre life in order to minimise the site’s
requirement for tyres. The four pillars of tyre management necessary to achieve this are:
• Tyre Selection
• Tyre Maintenance
• Tyre Operation
• Tyre Awareness
11.1 Tyre selection
• Review tyre specification selection on site to optimise tyre specification by
application36, preferably based on actual site performance.
o There can be 50% difference in life performance between the optimum
specification and an incorrect one.
• Carefully monitor the specifications of tyres delivered to site – especially OE tyres
on new equipment if fortunate enough to still be receiving equipment with tyres – to
ensure that they are the specifications ordered (and, presumably, the specifications
that have been properly determined as being optimum for the site).
• If there is a need to purchase alternative, newcomer brand tyres, be prepared for
average tyre life being much lower than that of the Big-3 brands.
11.2 Tyre maintenance
• Inflation pressure control is the most important maintenance aspect of EM tyre
operation, in terms of tyre life. Ensure that the highest quality is maintained.
• Where possible, fit larger tyres to equipment, eg. for haultrucks, convert 37.00x57
to 40.00x57 fitment, 33.00x51 to 36.00x51, 36.00x51 to 37.00x57, and 27.00x49 to
30.00x5137; for graders, convert 23.5x25 to 26.5x25 fitment.
• Using newcomer brands at present typically means converting from radial to bias
ply tyres which have two maintenance related aspects associated with them:
o They tend to leak air (between the tyre bead and the rim) at a greater rate
than radial tyres; so more frequent pressure checking and reinflation may be
required.
o Because of their much larger and less flexible bead area, bias ply tyres
usually necessitate an EM tyre press for dismounting them from a rim.
• Investigate repairing and retreading options in order to maximise overall life
achieved from each tyre casing.
11.3 Tyre operation
• Improve the design and maintenance standard of haulroads, benches, loading and
dumping areas.
• Reduce volumetric overloading of trucks to avoid rock spillage.
• Implement TKPH modules on mine management systems (eg. Modular Mining,
Wenco, etc) to reduce the incidence of low-life tyre heat failures – and perhaps
allow the change to longer life, more cut/abrasion resistant tyres.
• There are substantial operational implications of using alternative brand tyres,
particularly in the bias ply construction – tyre life has been mentioned above. Tyre
loading and truck speed must be monitored carefully because bias ply load and
36
Otraco usually regards front and rear tyre operation on a particular haultruck fleet as being different
applications.
37
These last two conversions also necessitate a change to a larger diameter, stilted rim.
26
OTRACO
workload (TKPH) ratings are considerably less than that of equivalent specification
radial tyres. Safety may also be an issue until sufficient confidence has been gained
on site through experience with these tyres; we recommend restricting haultruck,
loader and dozer fitments to rear axles until this “trust” threshold has been attained.
11.4 Tyre awareness
The vast majority of tyre premature failures are directly attributable to the machine operator.
• Develop a tyre conservation culture on site through training, presentations, wall
charts, competitions, etc.
• Review mine operator practices, eg. ban the changing of gear of mechanical drive
trucks while travelling loaded up a ramp (to avoid spillage).
11.5 Tyre supply agreements
In order to conserve tyres you need to have some.
• Every mining company should have the goal of a long term supply agreement with
one, or preferably two, of the Big-3 manufacturers. However the suppliers currently
have the upper hand and this goal is not always achievable – particularly for junior
miners.
• If it is not possible to obtain a Big-3 supply contract, then use the following general
guidelines when negotiating with alternative suppliers:
o Have formal supply agreements rather than relying on spot purchases.
o Lock suppliers into longer term contracts, with penalty clauses for nonsupply.
o Have at least two suppliers for the major tyre sizes used on site38.
• Accept that significant price increases are likely for EM tyres for at least the next
few years.
• Retain material and workmanship tyre warranty terms in any supply agreement,
although it has become harder to make claims under material and workmanship
warranty provisions, especially where mine site personnel do not have the technical
capacity to successfully counter tyre company reasons against reimbursement.
While performance39 warranties are almost impossible to obtain at present, retain
the potential to re-introduce them as the market settles.
• Remember, if purchasing alternative brand tyres, to factor in potential relative tyre
life when determining usage requirements. Also be wary of counterfeit branding –
the best way to avoid this is to purchase directly from the manufacturer.
• Monitor, at least on a monthly basis, tyre orders, deliveries, usage and site stocks.
Track tyres through the delivery chain. Plan at least five years out in terms of usage
requirements and supply.
• Pay particular attention to any requirements for unusual tyre sizes or non-standard
compounds.
o A new tyre size for a recently released machine, particularly if there is only
one manufacturer of this tyre size, would require special attention in relation
to stock requirements.
38
There is often argument over this point (a single supplier versus multiple suppliers) but in Otraco’s
experience having multiple suppliers usually reduces tyre shortage risk. It also makes sense from a tyre
management viewpoint as competition almost always results in higher tyre life and lower tyre cost per tonne.
39
Otraco believes that best form of warranty is the relative performance system. Under this system each
supplier warrants his tyres to match the lowest average tyre cost per hour (or kilometre) result of the best
performing brand operated in the same application and over the same period.
27
OTRACO
•
o The requirement for extra heat or cut resistant tyres40 is often more difficult
to fulfil than that for standard compound tyres.
When in future the situation that we are currently experiencing is reversed and
supply dominates demand, learn from the lessons of the past decade and do not
gouge EM tyre manufacturers in relation to tyre pricing.
11.6 Mine and fleet optimisation
Some types or makes of haultruck are more suited to particular haul profiles from a tyre
point of view. Running a haultruck whose weight distribution is biased towards the front axle
could be disastrous in a downhill loaded application. Some tyre specifications are optimal for
short haul applications while susceptible to low-life premature failure on long hauls.
• Consider assigning truck fleets by mining area (where haulage profiles may be
distinctly different on a particular minesite).
• Consider swapping trucks and other mining equipment between sites, if this option is
available, in order the optimise equipment fleet tyre operation according to site
conditions.
11.7 Alternatives to EM tyres
• Review mining and hauling processes used on site – it may be possible to modify a
tyre intensive application to reduce tyre usage, eg. in relation to the increased
utilisation of existing shovels/excavators, in-pit conveyors, etc.
• Some minesites, particularly where hauls are long and road conditions are good,
may be suited to large road truck/road train applications – there is no global supply
constraint whatsoever for tyre sizes used in these applications.
40
In an emergency, it is possible to fit more heat resistant tyres than what is optimum for a particular operation
(although tyre operating cost will become considerably higher); however running more cut resistant tyres than
optimum could result in low-life heat failures, major disruption to mine production, and zero tyre stock
situations.
28
OTRACO
12. References and Sources
• Global Tyre Report 2006 published by the European Rubber
Journal (ERJ) – for tyre company revenue and ownership
information.
• Tyre manufacturers and distributors through direct discussions,
questionnaires completed by them, catalogues and website
information.
• The Parker Bay Company, Mr Peter Gilewicz – for information on
global haultruck populations and annual deliveries.
• Malaysian Rubber Board – for natural rubber pricing.
• US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics – for tyre raw
materials pricing (excluding natural rubber), consumer price index
and producer cost index information.
• Intergroup Shipping (WA) Pty Ltd, Mr Ron Hewer – for information
on global shipping trends.
• Status of the EM Tyre Market, October 2001 published by Otraco
International Pty Ltd, compiled by Mr Bernd Tamsen.
• Status of the EM Tyre Market, June 2004 published by Otraco
International Pty Ltd, compiled by Mr Tony Cutler.
29
OTRACO
APPENDIX 1 – EM TYRE MANUFACTURERS & DISTRIBUTORS
Appendix 1A – Major EM Tyre Manufacturers’ Radial Tyre Sizes
(Established & Major Newcomer Brands)
Appendix 1B – Major EM Tyre Manufacturers’ Bias Ply Tyre Sizes
Appendix 1C – Major EM Tyre Manufacturers’ Websites
Appendix 1D – Minor EM Tyre Manufacturers
(Minor/Upcoming Newcomer Brands)
Appendix 1E – EM Tyre Distributors of Newcomer Brands
30
OTRACO
31
OTRACO
32
OTRACO
33
OTRACO
34
OTRACO
35
OTRACO
APPENDIX 2 – EM TYRE MANUFACTURER & DISTRIBUTOR
QUESTIONNAIRES
Appendix 2A – Manufacturer Questionnaires
Appendix 2B – Distributor Questionnaires
Otraco sent the questionnaire to manufacturers and distributors for whom
we had an email address. Not all manufacturers and distributors to whom
we sent the questionnaire responded.
36
OTRACO
Appendix 2A – Manufacturer Questionnaires
Responses to Otraco questionnaire by Manufacturers of Major Newcomer
Brands.
Otraco did not send questionnaire forms to any of the Established Brand
manufacturers (Michelin, Bridgestone, Goodyear, Toyo, Yokohama,
General and Pirelli).
•
Uzmai International Sri
Maitech
•
Coba Tyre Pty Ltd
Coba
•
Magna Tyres
Magna
•
Hiflex Australia Group / Weihai Pingan Tyre Co Ltd
Pingan-Hiflex
•
Shifeng Double-star Tire Co Ltd
Ax, Goodluck
•
Haohua South China (Guilin) Rubber Co Ltd / Silkroad Tire Co
Ltd
Torch, Evergreen
•
Guangming Tyre Group Co. Ltd
Riverland, Supersonic
•
Qingdao Taifa Group Co. Ltd
BIW-TZ
•
XTIRE Inc
Ziggurat
37
OTRACO
38
OTRACO
39
OTRACO
40
OTRACO
41
OTRACO
42
OTRACO
43
OTRACO
44
OTRACO
45
OTRACO
46
OTRACO
Appendix 2B – Distributor Questionnaires
Responses to Otraco questionnaire by Distributors of Major and
Minor/Upcoming Newcomer Brands.
•
Sino Procur
•
National Tyres
•
Eminentire Inc
47
OTRACO
48
OTRACO
49
OTRACO
50
OTRACO
APPENDIX 3 – OTRACO MODEL OF EM HAULTRUCK
TYRE SUPPLY & DEMAND
Appendix 3A – Otraco Model Assumptions & Comments
Appendix 3B – Announced EM Tyre Production Expansions
Appendix 3C – Otraco Model Projections
51
OTRACO
Appendix 3A – Otraco Model Assumptions & Comments
52
OTRACO
Appendix 3B – Announced EM Tyre Production Expansions
53
OTRACO
Appendix 3C – Otraco Model Projections
All relevant tyre sizes
• 90 to 360mt trucks: 27.00x49 to 59/80x63 tyres
By tyre size range
• 90 to 110mt trucks: 27.00x49 to 30.00x51 tyres
•
140mt trucks: 33.00x51 tyres
•
154 to 190mt trucks: 36.00x51 to 42/90x57 tyres
•
220 to 225mt trucks: 40.00x57 to 46/90x57 sizes
•
290 to 360mt trucks: 50/80x57 to 59/80x63 sizes
Note:
The model predicts that 36.00x51 to 42/90x57 supply capacity will exceed
demand from 2009 onwards. If this were to eventuate then tyre manufacturers
would allocate some production resources from this tyre size range to another
size range for which demand exceeded supply.
54
OTRACO
Global Supply Vs Demand - 2700x49 to 59/80x63
140,000
Figure above each column is the surplus or (shortfall) in Supply over Demand of Equiv Big-3 Radials for that year
120,000
(11,265)
(7,172)
CY2008
CY2009
(3,649)
(13,294)
(11,835)
Tire Quantity
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
CY2006
CY2007
CY2010
Calendar Year
Demand of Equiv Big-3 Radials
Supply of Equiv Big-3 Radials
55
Supply of Actual Big-3 Radials
OTRACO
Global Supply Vs Demand - 2700x49 to 3000x51
50,000
45,000
40,000
Tire Quantity
35,000
(3,792)
(3,802)
CY2008
CY2009
(2,296)
(6,502)
(5,880)
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
CY2006
CY2007
CY2010
Calendar Year
56
OTRACO
Global Supply Vs Demand - 3300x51
25,000
20,000
(3,738)
(2,683)
(1,348)
CY2008
CY2009
CY2010
(3,154)
Tire Quantity
(2,214)
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
CY2006
CY2007
Calendar Year
57
OTRACO
30,000
2,645
25,000
1,225
Tire Quantity
20,000
(1,272)
(530)
CY2006
CY2007
(553)
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
CY2008
CY2009
CY2010
Calendar Year
Supply of Equiv Big-3 Radilas
58
OTRACO
35,000
30,000
(1,204)
(881)
CY2009
CY2010
(2,045)
(1,945)
25,000
Tire Quantity
(1,245)
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
CY2006
CY2007
CY2008
Calendar Year
59
OTRACO
Global Supply Vs Demand - 50/80x57 to 59/80x63
16,000
(1,769)
14,000
(708)
Tire Quantity
12,000
(1,137)
(1,162)
10,000
(1,225)
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
CY2006
CY2007
CY2008
CY2009
CY2010
Calendar Year
60
OTRACO
APPENDIX 4 – OIL, DERIVATIVES & RUBBER PRICING
Appendix 4A – Pricing for Oil and its Derivatives
Appendix 4B – Pricing for Natural and Synthetic Rubber
61
OTRACO
APPENDIX 4A – Pricing for Oil and its Derivatives
(based on a price index of 100 as at January 1990 for each commodity)
Price Index for Oil and its Derivatives
350
300
Price index
250
200
Oil
Carbon Black
Synthetic Rubber
150
100
50
Dec 1996 base
price index for
oil of 100
0
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
APPENDIX 4B – Pricing for Natural and Synthetic Rubber
(US cents/kg)
Price of Natural rubber compared with Synthetic rubber
300
US cents per kg
250
200
Natural Rubber
150
Synthetic Rubber
100
50
0
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
62

Status of the Earthmover Tyre Market

Transcription

Similar documents

EM Tyre Supply Shortage – How it is Affecting us

MICHELIN X®MULTIWAY™ Xd

Catalogue - Tech Europe

no sacrifice!

Focus on Tyres

alpine proven

The requirements for intelligent aircraft tyres

ETRA Conference - Città Metropolitana di Torino

LRM2 pdf - published November 2010

AUTOSTAF F, SAP 1. Car masters basic courses: