Tag Archives: Economist Intelligence Unit

Japanese Car Industry Is Getting Nuked

The true effects of Japans auto industry after the earthquake is about to become clear. According the Economist Intelligence Unit, is it not good news.

Speculation has been rife about how the shortage of components and power will affect Japanese, and global, vehicle production.

Economist Intelligence Unit


The Japanese automotive industry is one of the most prominent industries in the world. Japan was the world’s largest vehicle manufacturer in 2008 but lost one rank in 2009 to current leader China, although the automotive industry in Japan still remains unrivalled by quality standards. But that has  all been changed.

During the 1960s, Japanese automakers launched a bevy of new kei cars in their domestic market.

These tiny automobiles usually featured very small engines to keep taxes much lower than larger cars.

The average person in Japan was now able to afford an automobile, which boosted sales dramatically and jump started the auto industry toward becoming what it is today.

Subaru 360

The first of this new era, actually launched in 1958, was the Subaru 360 . It was known as the “Lady Beetle”, comparing its significance to the Volkswagen Beetle in Germany .

Other significant models were the Suzuki Fronte , Mitsubishi 500 , Mazda Carol , and the Honda N360.

Suzuki Fronte

Rapidly increasing domestic demand and the expansion of Japanese car companies into foreign markets in the 1970s further accelerated growth.

Automobile production in Japan continued to increase rapidly after the 1970s, as Mitsubishi (as Dodge vehicles) and Honda began selling their vehicles in the US.

Even more brands came to America and abroad during the 1970s, and by the 1980s, the Japanese manufacturers were gaining a major foothold in the US and world markets.

But during a few minutes on March 11 this year all that changed.

To me it is another example of how vulnerable we humans are, and that there is no algorithm in the world that can predict events of this kind.

But if we spent more time watching what actually is going on, instead of trying to calculate it, we might have been given a fair warning.

See also – More Mysterious “Monster Fish” Comes To Surface

Anyway – the Economist Intelligence Unit have just released a report on the consequences of the earthquake for the once great Japanese Car Industry. Company by company.

It is kinda depressing.

Here is a summary:

The automotive sector, along with the electronics industry, quickly emerged as the industry suffering most from Japans devastating March 11th earthquake and subsequent tsunami.

Speculation has been rife about how the shortage of components and power will affect Japanese, and global, vehicle production.

But only now are that the true facts starting to be seen.

Figures released this week showed that Japan‘s vehicle sales slumped to their lowest-ever monthly tally in April, down 51% from April 2010 to just 108,824 units.

Domestic carmakers all suffered badly, but Toyota was particularly badly hit, with sales down 69%.

A few foreign carmakers, notably South Korea’s Hyundai and Kia, gained ground thanks to the disruption.

The sales numbers confirmed last week’s bad news from the Japanese carmakers, whose production reports for March made for depressing reading.

All of the major vehicle manufacturers bar Nissan built at least 50% fewer cars in their Japanese factories in March compared to a year ago, while most of their overseas facilities also saw output fall.

To blame was the back-up in the supply chain of crucial components, as well as disruptions to the car and component factories electricity supply.

Toyota is the worst-hit of them all.

Domestic output plunged by 62.7% during March compared to the previous year to just 129,491 vehicles, which was the company’s lowest monthly production total since records began in 1976.

Component shortages have also forced Toyota to halt production at plants all over the world.

Its production outside of Japan slumped by 29.9% in March to 542,465 vehicles and in the US,

Toyota’s factories are currently operating at just 30% of capacity. With the April sales drop mirroring this slump in output, the numbers are now looking so bad that Toyota risks having to hand back the title of worlds largest carmaker to General Motors (GM) of the US, from whom it stole it in 2008.

Most of Toyota’s rivals are in the same situation. Hondas Japanese and rest-of-world production fell by 62.9% and 19.2%, respectively, in March.

Mazda Carol

Mazda’s domestic production fell by 53.6% and global production by 33.8%.

Mitsubishi fared better, witnessing a less shocking 25.7% fall in its domestic production in March to 49,434 units and a relatively modest 10.9% drop in global output to 106,229 units.

Japans second-largest carmaker Nissan is the only one with a positive story to tell.

Although its domestic production slumped by 52.4% in March to 47,590 vehicles, this was offset by record global production levels. Nissan’s rest-of-world production soared by 33.3% to 335,114 units in March, its highest-ever monthly tally.

This pushed up the company’s global production for the month by 9% above last years levels, to a record 382,704 units.

The disruption caused by the earthquake and tsunami are unsurprising, given the number of component suppliers that are based in north-eastern Japan.

But more worrying still is how long it will take most of the carmakers to get their production levels back to normal.

After conducting an in-depth analysis of its suppliers, Toyota says that normal production will not resume until either November or December of this year.

Mitsubishi 500

Japanese production will start to ramp up in July and North American production will ramp up in August, once the required components are shipped overseas from Japan.

The company says it does plan to continue procuring parts from the same suppliers, but is also considering substitute parts from other suppliers.

There is still an unstable supply of around 150 components, mainly electronic, rubber and paint-related, the company said.

To all the customers who made the decision to buy a vehicle made by us, I sincerely apologise for the enormous delay in delivery, were the words of Toyota President Akio Toyoda.

Honda N360

Likewise, Honda admits that it will not be business as usual until the end of 2011.

As the supply of parts remains fluid, decisions concerning production from July on will be made step-by-step while monitoring the situation, the company said in a statement.

Until then, many of its factories, both in Japan and overseas will continue to operate at half of their planned production levels for the year.

Nissan, on the other hand, is bullish about its near-term outlook, predicting that its global production for May will stand at 90% of its planned production levels.

“Since we took measures in the immediate aftermath of the quake, we have been able to procure components necessary for our immediate production,” is the company’s only explanation so far on how it has achieved this.

At the same time as coping with the disruption in supplies, carmakers will also have to cope with the continued disruption in the Japan car market.

April’s slump in demand was mainly supply related, but there is little doubt that the tsunami will also have an effect on national demand at least in the short-term.

In the north-east, the disruption to infrastructure and demand will last far longer.

In the longer term, the building work required to repair the damage will boost the economy again, but the ongoing crisis at the Fukushima nuclear power plant has confounded expectations that the recovery will be quick.

In April, the Economist Intelligence Unit once again downgraded its forecast for Japan’s GDP growth from 1.4% to just 1% for 2011. We did, however, make a slight upward revision to our forecast for 2012, which now stands at 1.8% growth.

This is a slightly conservative forecast compared to the 2.3% growth in 2012 predicted by the France-based OECD.

Its report, issued last week, found that an extended downturn in the Japanese economy was unlikely, thanks to a pick-up in trade from the wider Asian region, as well as government fiscal stimulus packages.

If that is true, then it will be some small comfort to Japan’s carmakers, who continue to struggle through their worst-ever crisis.

By Economist Intelligence Unit

1 Comment

Filed under International Econnomic Politics, Philosophy, Technology

Is The Global Economy Really Shock-Proof?

How many bailouts will people accept? Before someone is forced to default? The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind. But the Economist’s Intelligence Unit is on the case.

“The global economy has endured an extraordinary array of shocks so far this year, from turbulence in the Middle East and North Africa to the Japanese tsunami. And yet growth prospects are reasonably good.”

Robin Bew


This blogger is far from sure about the global economy being shock-proof. But the Economist Intelligence Unit seems to think it is – almost. Anyway, it’s an interesting question.


“The global economy has endured an extraordinary array of shocks so far this year, from turbulence in the Middle East and North Africa to the Japanese tsunami. And yet growth prospects are reasonably good,” chief economist Robin Bew says in a presentations of EIU’s latest research.

In this webcast, he explain why they belive positives such as the continued US recovery are likely to offset at least in part some of the negatives. The webcast also gives EIU’s latest views on inflation, Japan‘s disaster response and the dollar.

The risk analysts looks at Russia‘s efforts to foster innovation. The country has many of the attributes needed for high-tech success, as well as problems – such as massive inefficiencies in the energy sector – for which innovation could provide solutions.

“But will the state’s paternalistic instincts get in the way?” EIU ask.

The industry experts examines the US retail market where, despite a fragile recovery in sales, vacancy rates in shopping malls have reached record highs.

“As US discount chains snap up good deals on the best locations, European retailers may be missing a rare opportunity.”

3 Comments

Filed under International Econnomic Politics, National Economic Politics

2011 Key European Issue: Politicians And Politics

According to The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) will European politicians and lawmakers come under heavy pressure in 2011, as the politics become more confrontational and creditor countries’ willingness to sustain financial support is fading away. New austerity measures will be implemented and trigger a new wave of social unrest. It’s looking more and more like a worst case scenario, but at least the responsibility for the whole mess is about to be put in the right place.

“It cannot be ruled out that Europe will witness its first sovereign defaults since 1948.”

Economist Intelligence Unit


If a sovereign default should happen, it would put huge strains on banks’ balance sheets, potentially triggering further bank recapitalization in core euro states, EIU argues. “The EU economy has revived somewhat following an unprecedented contraction in 2008-09, but the recovery will remain faltering and uneven, with some countries recovering pre-crisis output levels quickly and others suffering long and painful adjustments,” the analyst concludes.

This is the key remarks by the EIU-analysts in their 2011 report:

* Euro crisis.

The sovereign debt crisis will continue to cast a shadow over the euro zone, and doubts about the single currency’s long-term survival will not easily be assuaged. Policymakers are slowly coming to terms with the fact that the survival of the euro area cannot simply be taken for granted and will depend on careful management of current stresses in the bond markets and weak banking systems, as well as reforms to fiscal governance and more determined efforts to tackle structural problems. Our core forecast is that the euro zone will avoid collapse in 2011, but there are likely to be more than a few uncomfortable moments. We expect that Portugal will be forced to access the EU/IMF financial stability fund, while Spain will need to roll over about 21% of its public debt in 2011, in addition to financing a budget deficit of over 7% of GDP. Financial-market jitters could resurface for many reasons, but a particular concern would be if investors became fundamentally convinced that the EU/IMF fund, nominally worth $750bn (US$990bn), was inadequate to bail out those countries needing assistance. Spain probably won’t need to request a bail-out, but the size of its economy means that any doubts on this front would present a particular risk to euro zone stability. The European Central Bank (ECB), meanwhile, by purchasing government bonds, has stepped into politically controversial territory and is likely to find it increasingly difficult to step back.

* Austerity.

The need to reduce large budget deficits will remain an obvious challenge for many members of the euro zone, and also for the UK. In 2011 austerity will become more visible in European countries as cuts in public services and pay bite. Economic conditions will also be rendered more difficult by the fact that the drivers of the global recovery in 2010 will have largely faded. A key question will be whether the supposed “cure” for fiscal ills will do the “patients” more harm than good by undermining economic growth so much that fiscal ratios worsen or, at least, fail to improve as much as policymakers had hoped. Moreover, if fiscal tightening starts to jeopardize the recovery, it may tempt governments to defer necessary austerity measures. The UK will prove a good test-case in this regard. The coalition government’s dramatic five-year fiscal consolidation programme comprises a mix of tax rises and the deepest sustained period of real-term public spending restraint since the 1940s. We remain of the view that policymakers are over-estimating the ability of a structurally weak private sector to drive economic activity as austerity bites, which could see the government facing the dilemma of either choking off the recovery or risking a rapid shift in investor sentiment by backing away from its fiscal targets.


* Social unrest.

Deep spending cuts and tax rises could have serious detrimental impacts on social and political stability. Sacrifices have been and will continue to be demanded of all those receiving salaries, pensions or other benefits from the state, while unemployment among public-sector workers is likely to increase. Greece in particular has been facing ongoing strikes against government austerity measures, by both public- and private-sector workers. We expect widespread industrial unrest to continue, but do not expect unrest to undermine the government’s efforts to rein in its budget deficit significantly. Political stability in Ireland will be significantly tested. So far, Irish citizens have accepted two years of austerity budgets with little protest. But the prospect of deeper cuts in the years ahead as demanded by the EU/IMF as a condition of Ireland’s $85bn rescue is likely to inspire social unrest. Dangers of social strife in other EU countries exist, but are lower than in the case of Greece and Ireland. Portugal has already undergone a long period of austerity and weak growth. Spain is only at the beginning of a period of public-sector tightening, but is over two years into a recession caused by a collapse in its property market (as well as the international financial turmoil) and has seen unemployment rise to over 20%, double that of most other countries, without so far experiencing anything worse than disciplined and peaceful protests. In France, recent trade union strikes to protest against an overhaul of the state-pension system served as a reminder of the potential for protests to cause significant economic disruption and trigger outbreaks of rioting. The government is likely to delay any further controversial reforms ahead of the 2012 elections. Trade unions in the UK are also expected to stage strikes as the scope of the government’s public-sector cuts become clearer. Comparatively tight legal restrictions on the ability to strike in the UK (in contrast to many other EU countries) will help the coalition to some extent, but we think that the scale of social unrest will prove to be considerably greater and more widespread than is currently assumed.


* Political relations.

The most important bilateral relationship in the EU is between Germany and France, both because their reconciliation laid the foundation of EU integration, and because they are the two largest euro area economies. As the political dynamics of the ongoing sovereign debt crisis demonstrate, Germany’s role in Europe is now more central than it has ever been. We expect Germany to maintain its commitment to the euro, but it’s increasingly assertive promotion of its national interest and reluctance to discuss the issue of macroeconomic imbalances within the euro area could trigger wider tensions. Relations between Chancellor Merkel and President Sarkozy have long been difficult and as discussions over how to hold the euro area together continue, frequent shows of unity are likely to be undermined by fundamental disagreements on crucial matters. There is a risk that relations could deteriorate. In general, French attitudes to the EU have become more sceptical in recent years, as the increase in the EU’s membership has reduced France’s influence. Mr Sarkozy may be able to point to the reform of financial regulations as evidence that the EU is developing in line with France’s aims, but the sovereign debt crisis has also increased the likelihood of a clash with the EU over the poor state of the French public finances.

* State aid.

Given how dependent many financial institutions are on national government and ECB assistance, the removal of the panoply of support measures (including liability guarantees, infusions of capital, government purchases of impaired assets and cheap central bank funding) might precipitate the failure of institutions and a further bout of financial panic. As a result, the phasing-out of support will be gradual. At the same time, efforts will continue to reconstruct internally those financial institutions that are being buttressed by government support. Having waved through all rescue packages at the height of the panic, the European Commission is now reasserting itself. It has already imposed large-scale downsizing on some banks, and more are being scrutinised. From the start of 2011, all financial institutions receiving state aid will be obliged to submit restructuring plans to the Commission (whereas previously this requirement was restricted to banks receiving support above 2% of their risk-weighed assets). The Commission’s active intervention is justified on the grounds that institutions that require state aid cannot be allowed an advantage over those that have survived unaided.

* Financial reform.

The implementation of a revised regulatory architecture for financial institutions will be high on the agenda, at national, EU and international levels. At the level of the EU, in September 2010 member states and the Parliament approved a major reform of the EU’s financial supervisory framework that will enable the creation in January 2011 of a European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), responsible for macroeconomic supervision, and three new bodies to oversee the supervision of banks, insurers and securities markets throughout the EU. European supervisory authorities (ESAs) will be charged with developing and helping to enforce a common rule book and reinforcing day-to-day supervision by national authorities. There is still considerable scope for any recommendations and decisions to be overturned by governments on the grounds of national budgetary competences. However, together with the new ESAs for the banking sector, the ESRB is likely to have considerable influence over future measures to counter the build-up of risk in the European financial system, such as capital boosts, counter-cyclical capital buffers or maximum loan/value ratios.

* EU budget.

The common agricultural policy (CAP), an elaborate mechanism to maintain prices of agricultural goods, was central to setting up the EU’s forerunner more than half a century ago. Although it has been reformed to be less market-distorting and costly for European taxpayers, many members wish to see further reforms designed to diminish EU intervention, whereas others are adamantly opposed. Recent extreme volatility in food prices and concerns about security of supply have strengthened the latter grouping. The CAP currently accounts for just under half of the total EU budget. Negotiations on how the CAP will be structured and funded for the next budgetary period (2014-21) will be time-consuming and contentious. Although the EU budget accounts for a mere 1% of member states’ combined GDP, and is unlikely to rise above this level, the amount that each member contributes generates some of the bloc’s most divisive and protracted disagreements. The next negotiations, which are already under way, will be at least as difficult as any before owing to the historically large deficits that many member governments are facing. The UK is leading a charge to cut the budget and wants the majority of savings to be found in cohesion funds, while maintaining spending on the CAP (which will please France and Germany). This will be fiercely resisted by newer, poorer member states from central and eastern Europe.

Greece was the first country ever to default in the year 4 BC. I looks like Greece is going to do it again, ups….

And a quick look at how the spreads on Irish Credit-default Swaps are moving, I think the Economist-people safely can replace their “ifs” with “when’s.”

But, you know, they are Economists.
Blogger Templates

.

Select Your Language:

English * Arabic * Chinese * Danish * French * German * Hebrew * Italian * Japanese * Norwegian * Portuguese * Russian * Spanish * Swedish * Turkish

Related by The Swapper:

2 Comments

Filed under International Econnomic Politics, National Economic Politics, Philosophy, Technology