executive summary · eletson: 9 vessels china shipping group: 8 vessels cosco: 8 vessels china...

1 2004 Charles R. Weber Company, Inc.

Quarterly Report June 2004

Executive Summary

Aims of this Study

The Panamax* sector is extremely complex and therefore difficult to understand. Ithas an important part to play in both the clean and crude oil markets. This studylooks in detail at the role of the Panamax in both the clean and dirty markets.However, rather than becoming mired in complexities, the report sets out three clearaims:

(1) Understand the recent surge in newbuilding investment in the Panamax sector.

(2) Provide a vessel by vessel employmentand trading profile for each vessel in thePanamax trading fleet.

(3) Provide an analysis of the trading patterns of the key Panamaxpools, as well asleading owners outside the pools.

It is intended to provide participants in this sector with a report that is both a marketinsight and a reference document.

As a reference document, the reader will have at his finger tips details of clean andspot fixture frequency for each vessel over the last 5 years, as well as, a regionaltrading breakdown for each vessel and pool membership details. Not to mentioninformation about hull type, sbt and coating where available.

* For the purposes of the study, Panamax vessels are defined as being greaterthan 50,000 Dwt, and with a beam measurement of no more than 32.2 m.

Understanding the recent surge in newbuilding investment in this sector

This sector (around 300 vessels) is a relatively small subset of the world tankerfleet, accounting for 6.5% of total deadweight– which compares to the VLCC sectormaking up 41%, and the Aframax sector at 18%.

Investors virtually abandoned this sector in the mid 1990’s, with just 8 vessels delivered in the period 1994 – 1998. This neglect has pushed the average age of the Panamax fleet to 15.6 years compared to 9.2 years for VLCC’s and 10.3 years for Aframax tonnage.

The Panamax sector is dominated by its orderbook (133 vessels) which is equivalent to 43% of the trading fleet. The Panamax orderbook is much greater as a percentage of its trading fleet, than both the VLCC (21%) and Aframax (30%) sectors.

However, it is worth noting that twenty eight (25%) of the Panamaxes on order are between 50,000 and 55,000 dwt. These vessels are effectively a new class of pumped up Handy Product tankers. As such, it may be considered that they exaggerate somewhat the extent of fleet growth in the Panamax sector, as they will undoubtedly slip into the dedicated handy clean trade

It is also worth noting that while a number of the larger vessels will also start out their trading lives as clean vessels, they have the flexibility to slip into dirty trading at any time depending on market dynamics.

Despite noting the special consideration that should be given to evaluating the Panamax orderbook, it is the case that with a fleet renewal program of this magnitude, there should be clear evidence as to why owners have decided to renew this aging tanker sector. However there is no single clear cut explanation for the upsurge of interest.

The difficulty in unravelling the motivation of Panamax investors is partly because the fleet is involved in both clean and dirty trades. Our analysis shows that 40% of the fleet is primarily engaged in clean trades, while 56% is primarily engaged in dirty trades and 4% in cross over trades.

The following sections look in turn at developments in the dirty and clean markets in order to uncover those growth trades that might explain the undoubted investor confidence underpinning the recent surge in newbuilding interest.


Executive Summary (continued)

We will now explore other factors to try to explain the confidence shown by investors in the Panamax market.

One way of determining how the Panamax market will develop is to study trading patterns of the most modern vessels. However, by studying the trading patterns of the 58 vessels delivered since 2000, the main finding is “no change”. The chart shows that new tonnage has primarily slotted into the primary Panamax dirty trade (LAmr-NAmr) and primary clean trade (ME-FE/SEA/SA). There is evidence that North America seems to attract more than its share of new tonnage (trades from Northern Europe and North Africa).

Another way of determining how the market will develop is to review which countries are increasing/decreasing their requirement for Panamax tonnage.

Our tracking analysis suggests that the following countries are increasing or maintaining their interest in Panamax tonnage:

USA, China, Taiwan, Russia (Baltic), Russia (East), Mexico, Chile, Singapore


Panamax Dirty Trades – In decline and dependent on Latin American Trades

Panamaxdirty spot trades have contracted by 17% 1998 – 2003. During this period,Panamax share of total crude oil dirty spot trades has fallen from 14% to 10%. Bycomparison Aframax dirty spot trade volumes are virtually unchanged from 1998 to2003, while Aframax market share has remained stable at around 24%.

Although Panamaxesoperate globally, spot trades are dominated by Latin Americanliftings (64%). There is evidence that this dominance is increasing with LatinAmerica market share of Panamax loadings expanding from a range of 53- 57% inthe period 1992 – 1996, to a range of 62- 67% in the period 1997 – 2003. By far themost important Panamax spot trade is LAmr – Namr, which accounted for 56% oftotal reported Panamaxdirty spot fixtures in 2003. This is down from a peak of 61%in 1998.

Panamax Clean Trades – expanding, but not as fast as 30-39,000 Dwct cargosector and dependent on Middle East

Panamax spot clean trades have expanded by 9% 1998 – 2003. However, overallclean trades have expanded much faster (36%) during this period. As a result,Panamax share of total clean spot trades has fallen from 29% to 24%. The 30-39,999 Dwct clean cargo sector is by far the fastest growing with market share risingfrom 42% to 54% 1998 – 2003. Conversely, the 20-29,999 Dwct cargo sector is indecline. Its market share fell from 21% to 15% over the same period.

Like the dirty Panamax trades, clean loadings are dominated by a single load region– the Middle East, which had 60% market share in 2003. Also like the dirty Panamaxsector, there is evidence that this dominance by a single load region is increasing.

Though predominantlymarginalisedto single markets in both clean and dirty, a clearreason for such strong fleet renewal in a shrinking sector is not immediatelyclear.However the clean sector seems to offer the greatest encouragement for investors.(The block of 28 clean 50- 55,000 dwt Panamaxvessels currently on order reflectsthe confidence that some investors have in a particular segment of the clean market).

Regional Trading Pattern of Vessels DeliveredPost 2000

0200400600800

10001200

BSEA

EMED

ESAF FE

FSUA

FSUB

FSUE JA

PLA

MR MENA

FRNA

MRNE

URRS

EA SA SEA

SEUR

WAFR

Port

Cal

ls

3


2004 Charles R. Weber Company, Inc.


Our tracking analysis suggests that the following countries are losing interest inPanamax tonnage:

Russia (Black), Japan, Venezuela, Ecuador, Northern Europe, Italy, South Asia

Another factor central to understanding the prospects for the development of thePanamax market is the role of pools. The strength of pools is a keycharacteristic of the Panamax market in both the clean and dirty sectors with 83vessels (equivalentto more than 25% of the fleet) in one of the four major pools. It iscalculated that 55 dirty trading vessels and 28 clean trading vessels are in pools.

Pooling arrangements have an increasingly important role across the tanker markete.g. Alliance Chartering in the Suezmax sector, and Tankers International in theVLCC sector. In a traditionally fragmented market, pools are an illustration of anattempt by owners to increase their bargaining power by offering a modern, customerorientated service. In theory, this attempt to exert greater control of their operatingenvironment(to get away from the familiar cycle of boom and bust) should extend toa more professional approach to managing fleet renewal.

However, pools – although important - do not dominate the orderbook. Poolparticipants account for around 20% of the vessels on order, which is an underrepresentation compared to their 25%+ control of the trading fleet.

Fear of the speculator. An estimated55% of the vessels on order are for owners ofexisting tonnage. This means that 45% of the orderbook is taken up by “new”entrants to the Panamaxmarket. The fear is that some of these “new” entrants, andindeed some of the established owners may have placed “speculative” orders. Of the new investors in Panamax tonnage, for both clean and dirty trading, Parakou(8), Minerva (6), Western Petroleum (6), Expedo Canada (4), Finaval (4), TargetMarine ( 4), Wah Kwong ( 4) are the most important.

The Panamaxorderbook is dominated by European (North and South) owners. Thisregional block accounts for 74 of the vessels on order, or 56%.

Greek owners account for 42 vessels on order (32%), with Italians 18 vessels, HongKong 12, China 9, Japan 6, USA 6, Canada 4 other European 14.

For a full summary of the orderbook see page 15 of this report.

Summary of the Four Leading Panamax Pools:

Star TankersOperated by: Heidenreich MarineNo. of vessels: 44Average Age: 14.1 yearsTrading profile: virtually dedicated to LAmr-NAmr dirty trades

ScorpioOperated by: ScorpioNo. of vessels: 9Average Age: 2.3 yearsTrading profile: mainly dirty trading focused on LAmr-NAmr, but also presence inNEur and the Med

StelCapeOperated by: Cape Tankers No. of vessels: 12Average Age: 7.1 yearsTrading profile: like Star Tankers dedicated to LAmr-NAmr dirty trades

TormOperated by: TormNo. of vessels: 28Average Age: 12.1 yearsTrading Profile: only clean pool. Focused on long haul Middle East trades to SouthAsia, South East Asia and Far East.

4




It is interesting to note that the averageage of the dirty pools is 11.9 compared to therest of the fleet at 16.5 years. The average age of the Torm clean pool is 12.1compared to the rest of the fleet at 17.3 years.

Other significant owners:

Novoship: 12 vesselsIndian Govt: 11 vesselsEletson: 9 vesselsChina Shipping Group: 8 vesselsCosco: 8 vesselsChina Govt: 4 vesselsTsakos Shpg & Trdg 7 vessels (also has 5 tankers in the Star Tankers pool)

It is also worth considering that investors may not be the only force behind the recentstrength of Panamax investment. It may be that shipyards are also responsiblein part for the ordering boom.

Have hungry new shipyards enticed cash rich owners with preferential paymentplans and deliverydates on Panamax tanker berths? (56 of the panamaxvessels onorder or over 42 % coming out of two relativelynew and therefore very competitiveSouth Korean yards. STX (35 vessels) and New Century (21 vesels)). Has a lack ofberth capacity for other sizes and types of vessels lead owners to the Panamaxtanker sector?

Conclusion

Are “the numbers” driving the Panamax ordering increase?

Has a buoyant Tanker market across all sectors and unprecedented returns in thedry markets enticed non-traditional owners into the Panamax sector? Have reportsof lack of immediate infrastructure, refining capacity and deep water berths in themuch heralded expanding markets of China and India increased interest in thesector? Have hungry new shipyards enticed cash rich owners with preferentialpayment

plans and deliverydates on Panamaxtanker berths? (56 of the panamaxvessels onorder or over 42 % coming out of two relativelynew and therefore very competitiveSouth Korean yards. STX (35 vessels) and New Century (21 vesels)). Has a lack ofberth capacity for other sizes and types of vessels lead owners to the Panamaxtanker sector? Has a cursory look at the age profile of the Panamax fleet comparedto the age profile and orderbookfor Aframax’s up to 2007 (in excess of 150 vessels)and the age profile and orderbook for product tankers (excluding chemical carriers)up to 2007 (in excess of 160 vessels) driven owners to conclude that this is thesector to be in? Whatever investors motivation for diving into the Panamax sectorwith such gusto, what is clear is that by 2007 the last of the untouched tankersectors will have experiencedthe same renewalas all other tanker sectors, let’s justhope demand experiences the same renewal!

Table of Contents: Weber Quarterly Report Series:

Executive Summary - 1

Panamax Trade AnalysisOverview of Panamax Spot Trades - 6Expanding/Declining Panamax Dirty Spot Trades - 7 Sources:Expanding/Declining Panamax Clean Spot Trades - 8Focus on Panamax Pools - 9

Panamax Fleet Methods & Definitions:Fleet Changes - Last 10 years - 11 Panamax Fleet: all tanker, products & combis >=50,000Dwt, built in or after 1970 which haveCurrent Fleet Summary - 12 a beam of less than 32.26m.Panamax Fleet Ownership Size/Age Distribution - 13 Panamax Spot Cargoes: Dirty >=50,000Dwct, =50,000DwctOrderbook Summary - 14 Dwct defined as Deadweight Cargo TonnesOrderbook Listing - 15 Information as at 1st May 2004 unless otherwise statedDouble Hull Analysis - 16 Regional Definitions: Aust = Australasia, BSea = Black Sea, ESAF = East/South Africa,Impact of IMO Single Hull Phase-Out - 17 Jap = Japan, LAmr = Latin America, ME = Middle East, NAfr = North Africa, NAmr = NorthFleet Forecast - 18 America, NEur = Northern Europe, NSea = North Sea, RSea = Red Sea, SA = South Asia,

SEA = South East Asia, WAfr = West AfricaAppendicesPanamax Vessel by Vessel Trading Profile - 19 Contact Details:

Charles R. Weber Company Inc. voice (1) 203-629-2300Greenwich Office Park One facsimilie (1) 203-629-9101Greenwich telex 179100 WEBTANK CTConnecticut, 06831, USA e-mail [email protected]

Disclaimer website http://www.crweber.comEditorial Board:Basil G. Mavroleon - Managing DirectorHalvor H. Kielland - DirectorGeorge T. Eden - Director


Contents, Sources & Methods, Disclaimer

Whilst care has been taken in the production of this study, no liability can be accepted forany loss incurred in any way whatsoever by any person who may seek to rely on theinformation contained herein. The information in this report may not be reproduced withoutthe written permission of Charles R. Weber, Inc.

The Charles R. Weber, Inc. Quarterly Report Series is published four times per year. Itreviews important topics within the tanker shipping industry and tanker sectors that are ofparticular interest. It focuses on changes in tanker trading patterns and changes in fleetsupply. It identifies trading and investment possibilities within the tanker sector.

Charles R. Weber internal data sources, Intl Energy Agency (IEA), Energy InformationAgency (EIA), BPAmoco, Lloyds Maritime Information Services (LMIS), LRFairplay


Panamax Dirty Spot Trades (based on 50-79,999Dwct cargoes)

Panamax Clean Spot Trades (based on 50,000+Dwct cargoes)


Overview of Panamax Spot Trades


Dirty Panamax Spot Volumes 1998-e2004

0

50

100

150

98 99 00 01 02 03 e04

Milli

on D

wct

5%

7%

9%

11%

13%

15%

Perc

enta

ge

50-79,999Dwct Cargo Stems Panamax Market Share

Clean Panamax Spot Volumes 1998-e2004

0

10

20

30

40

98 99 00 01 02 03 e04

Milli

on D

wct

15%17%19%21%23%25%27%29%31%

Perc

enta

ge

50,000Dwct + Cargo Stems Panamax Market Share

Panamax dirty spot trades have contracted by 17% 1998-2003. During this period, Panamax share of total crude oil dirty spot trades has fallen from 14% to 10%. VLCC (40%) & Suezmax (22%) market share has remained relatively stable over the last few years, while Aframax share has expanded from 23% to 26% between 1998-2003.

Although Panamaxes operate globally, spot trades are dominated by Latin American liftings (64%). There is evidence that this dominance is increasing with Latin American market share of Panamax loadings expanding from a range of 53-57% in the period 1992-6, to a range of 62-67% in the period 1997-2003.

By far the most important Panamax spot trade is LAmr-NAmr, which accounted for 56% of total Panamax dirty spot fixtures in 2003. This is down from a peak of 61% in 1998.

Panamax clean spot trades have expanded by 9% 1998-2003. However, overall clean trades have expanded much faster (36%) during this period. As a result, Panamax share of total clean spot trades has fallen from 29% to 24%. The 30-39,999Dwct clean cargo sector is by far the fastest growing with market share rising from 42% to 54% 1998-2003. Conversely, the 20-29,999Dwct cargo sector is in decline. Its market share fell from 21% to 15% over the same period.

Like the dirty Panamax trades, clean loadings are dominated by a single load region - the Middle East, which had a 60% market share in 2003. Also like the dirty Panamax market, there is evidence that this dominance by a single load region is increasing.

Middle Eastern clean Panamax spot trades are more diverse than Latin America dirty Panamax spot trades. The largest trade in 2003, ME-Jap accounted for 25% of the total clean Panamax spot market

Latin America accounted for 64% ofPanamax dirty spot liftings in 2003

Middle East accounted for 60% of Panamax clean spot liftings in 2003

5 Best Performing Panamax Dirty Spot Trades (50-79KDwct)

93 98 03 %chgMnTons MnTons MnTons 98-03

Intra Latin America 3.67 6.10 7.43 22%

Northern Europe-North America 5.78 7.34 7.98 9%

Black Sea-Southern Europe 0.76 4.46 4.80 8%

Middle East-South Asia 0.19 1.34 2.64 97%

West Africa-North America 0.49 0.67 1.42 112%

5 Worst Performing Panamax Dirty Spot Trades (50-79KDwct


Latin America-North America 65.76 99.45 60.05 -40%

Intra South East Asia 6.73 8.14 5.39 -34%

Intra Northern Europe 11.04 3.34 0.95 -72%

North Africa-Southern Europe 6.24 4.48 0.34 -92%

Latin America-Northern Europe 5.52 1.23 0.26 -79%

Total Spot Volumes 143.83 157.79 131.68 -17%

7

Analysis based on 50000-79,999 Dwct cargo dirty spot fixtures. Figures are in million tonnes

Pmaxs have seen off Handys and then Smaxs over the last 10 yrs. Market share has increased from54% in 1998 to 77% in 2003. Although Pmax volumes have increased by 22% in period 98-03, overall tradehas fallen by 14% and is now just 10% of total LAmr dirty spot liftings

Although trade up 9% 98-03, actually peaked at 10MnTons in 2000. Total volumes on trade have alsofallen since 2000, but Pmax market share has slipped from high of 21% to 5 year low 15% in 2003. Theyoungest average age of the leading trades at 9.6 years (Intra LAmr = 13.8yrs)

Important Pmax growth trades (+8% 98-03), but dipped to 5 year low in 2003 (4.8MnTons) from a highof 7.5MnTons in 2002. Aframaxes and to a lesser extent Suezmaxes starting to dominate

Relatively fast growing Pmax trade (+97% 98-03) with market share rising to 7% in 2003 from a low ofjust 5% in 2000. However, in a overall fast growing trade dominated by VLCCs and Smaxs, Pmaxs haveonly a niche position e.g. discharging to Cochin in India. Attracts ageing vessels - average age = 19+years. Of interest to note that Pmaxs are losing out on longer haul MEast trades to SEAsia and Far East.

Like ME-SA, an expanding niche trade dominated by VLCCs and Suezmaxes. Unlike ME-SA, overallspot volumes have fallen over the last 5 years. Discharges include Long Beach and Los Angeles viaPanama Canal. North Africa-NAmr is another niche Panamax trade serving NAmr

By far the most important Pmax trade. Spot cargo volumes in decline since the mid 90s, but Pmaxmarket share holding firm at over 80%. Mexico is the main exporter, followed by Venezuela & Colombia.Comparatively young vessels on this trade with average age of 11 years. It appears that 2003 was anexceptionally poor year. The market was hit particularly badly in 2003 by fall in Mexican exports. Othervessel sectors (including Aframaxes) have a relatively minor role

Amaxs have been the main beneficiary of a recovery in trade volumes following a dip in the mid 90s.Pmaxs have seen volumes fall by 34% 98-03, while market share has dropped from 25% to 15%.

An important Pmax market until the mid 90s, but by 2000 volumes had fallen below 2MnTons (from14MnTons in 1992) and market share had collapsed from more than 20% to around 2-3%. Aframaxes arethe dominant force on this trade but also seeing declining volumes

Virtually an abandoned Pmax trade with volumes now less than 1MnTons. Total spot trade on this routehas dropped by 27% in the period 98-03 with growing Black Sea exports a primary factor

Pmax involvement in this trade has been in decline since the early 90s, while the spot trade itself hascontracted by around 75% in the last 10 years


Expanding/Declining Panamax Dirty Spot Trades


5 Best Performing Panamax Clean Spot Trades (50KDwct+)


Middle East-Japan 7.14 8.65 9.15 6%

Middle East-Far East 1.90 3.43 4.35 27%

Middle East-Northern Europe 0.33 0.63 3.83 508%

Northern Europe-North America 0.42 1.93 3.63 88%

Middle East-South Asia 0.15 1.00 1.54 54%

5 Worst Performing Panamax Clean Spot Trades (50KDwct+)


Russia (Baltic)-Northern Europe 1.84 0.21 -89%

Intra Far East 1.47 0.05 -97%

North Africa-Latin America 0.12 0.79 0.07 -91%

Intra South East Asia 0.11 0.78 0.06 -92%

South East Asia-Japan 0.91 0.75 0.28 -63%

Total Spot Volumes 24.35 34.37 37.31 9%

8

Analysis based on 50000Dwct+ cargo clean spot fixtures. Figures are in million tonnes

Clean spot volumes have fluctuated on this trade but the trend remains upward. Pmaxs dominate with90%+ market share. Cargoes are widely sourced from the main Middle East oil producers

Like ME-Jap, trade volumes have fluctuated. However, trade in 2003 (4.35MnTons) reached highestlevel since 1997 peak (4.84MnTons). Very few sub 50,000Dwct cargoes on this trade. South Korea is theprimary discharge destination. ME-FEast has the youngest av vessel age at 9.5 years- just ahead of ME-Jap (10.3 yrs) and ME-NEur (11.3yrs)

This spot trade has got going only in the last 5 years and has experienced consistent growth thereafter.Pmax market share has fluctuated but was close to its peak in 2003 at 76%. Like ME-Jap, cargoes arewidely sourced with most destined for the UK. In contrast, the related Russia (Baltic) to NEur trade almostdisappeared in 2003 having peaked at 2.92MnTons in 1999

Total trade has increased sharply in the last 3 years. Pmax volumes have also increased but marketshare has fallen from a high of 49% in 1997 to 23% in 2003. In contrast, the related Russia (Baltic)-NAmrtrade has stagnated over the last 5 years. Relatively old average age = 14yrs

Although volumes peaked in 2003, this trade has a chequered history with volumes fluctuating around1MnTons for the last 10 years. Like NEur-NAmr relatively old average age = 14 yrs

Russia (Baltic) to NEur trade almost disappeared in 2003 having peaked at 2.92MnTons in 1999.Overall trade volumes have also fallen sharply, dipping below 2MnTons in 2003 for the first time since 1995

While Pmax spot volumes have been heading steadily lower (-97% 98-03), overall volumes have beenrelatively stable. Consequently Pmax market share has fallen from 24% to


Focus on Panamax Pools


Stelcape PoolVessel Name Parent Dwt Year

BuiltCabo Hellas Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69250 2003Cabo Sounion Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69636 2004Cleliamar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 68600 1993Faith IV Transpetrol Services 63765 1987Four Moon Premuda 64912 1984Jademar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69697 2002Pearlmar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69697 2002Polys Stelmar Tankers Mngt 68623 1993Reymar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69636 2004Rosemar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69697 2002Rubymar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69697 2002Trader Transpetrol Services 60961 1987

Torm Clean PoolVessel Name Parent Dwt Year

BuiltAction Express Mitsui O.S.K. 69998 1990Challenge Express Mitsui O.S.K. 68536 1991Difko Birtha Tesma Denmark 83870 1987Difko Chaser Tesma Holdings 84040 1990Difko Hanne Tesma Denmark 83970 1987Difko Susanne Tesma Holdings 84040 1989Frontier Express Mitsui O.S.K. 68520 1993Kirsten Thome 83660 1988Mariella Thome 69999 1986Maritina Thome 77888 1986Nordmars Oldendorff K.E. 72000 2004Nordmerkur Oldendorff K.E. 72000 2004Nordneptun Oldendorff K.E. 72000 2004Nordvenus Oldendorff K.E. 72000 2004Northern Bell Thome 83651 1990Northsea Anvil Difko 84040 1990Northsea Dowel Tesma Holdings 84040 1989Panda Thome 83651 1987Sara Viking Waterfront Shipping 79999 1990Sitacamilla Waterfront Shipping 83260 1988Sitakathrine Waterfront Shipping 83920 1986Sitamarie Tesma Holdings 83987 1988Sitamia Tesma Holdings 84040 1988Sitavera Tesma Holdings 84040 1989Torm Anna Gotland 74999 2004Torm Estrid Torm Lines 74999 2004Torm Hilde Unibank 84040 1990Torm Margrethe Torm Lines 83955 1988

Star Tankers PoolVessel Name Parent Dwt Year

BuiltAgrari Cardiff Marine 63953 1984Alfios I Pleiades Shipping Agents 63105 1981Andes Tsakos Shipping & Trading 68439 2003Apnoia Centrofin Management 54661 1981Aramis Tsakos Shipping & Trading 60906 1983Aspropyrgos 72000 2004Athos I Tsakos Shipping & Trading 60880 1983Berthea Bergshav Management 61438 1981Bregen Tsakos Shipping & Trading 68159 1989Chemtrans Moon Chemikalien Seetransport 72296 2004Chemtrans Ray Chemikalien Seetransport 71637 2000Chemtrans Sea Chemikalien Seetransport 72000 2004Chemtrans Sky Chemikalien Seetransport 63381 2000Chemtrans Star Chemikalien Seetransport 63331 2000Chemtrans Sun Chemikalien Seetransport 71675 1999Dromeas Ionia Management 60489 1986Ekavi Dioryx Maritime 64972 1983Ektoras Phellas Management 61403 1981Elbe Omi 66800 1984Evinos Pleiades Shipping Agents 61728 1984Evros Pleiades Shipping Agents 63155 1983Hesnes Tsakos Shipping & Trading 68157 1990Iasonas Dioryx Maritime 71498 2003Iokasti Dioryx Maritime 60959 1983Ipanema Cardiff Marine 70914 1992Ismini Dioryx Maritime 62278 1983Ji Li Hu Cosco 66094 2000Ladon * Pleiades Shipping Agents 60875 1980Louros * Pleiades Shipping Agents 60958 1980Milagro * Cardiff Marine 60962 1983Miltiadis M Barclay Shipping 71522 2003Myron Dioryx Maritime 62153 1982Nile Omi 65755 1981Patroklos Dioryx Maritime 61405 1981Priamos Dioryx Maritime 65034 1983Prikonissos Ionia Management 66031 1981Protank Orinoco Ranger Marine 69131 1980Saetta Cardiff Marine 61683 1984Sanko Commander Dynacom Tankers Mngt 71056 2004Sanko Confidence Dynacom Tankers Mngt 71024 2004Sperchios Sanko Steamship 61540 1982Sun River China Shipping Group 62127 1993Tavropos Pleiades Shipping Agents 68600 2004Theo T Ionia Management 73021 2003* indicates vessels with beam greater than 32.26m

Scorpio PoolVessel Name Parent Dwt Year

BuiltAriadne Jacob Jacob E. 72640 2004Chaleur Bay Jacob E. 71345 2000Colin Jacob Jacob E. 72640 2004Goldmar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69684 2002Jill Jacob Jacob E. 61000 2003Los Roques Jacob E. 61130 2000Margara Jacob E. 60913 1999Silvermar Stelmar Tankers Mngt 69609 2002Venice * Scorpio Ship Mngt 81408 2001* indicates vessels with beam greater than 32.26m


Focus on Panamax Pools (continued)


Fleet Size and Average Age

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Scorpio Star Tankers Stelcape Torm

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Aver

age

Age

Age Distribution of Pools

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04

Year of Build

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

ScorpioStelcapeStar TankersTorm

Regional Trading Distribution 2003-1Q04NAmr LAmr NEur Med WAfr EAfr RSea ME SA FEast

Star Tankers 48% 36% 4% 5% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 6%Scorpio 46% 20% 12% 12% 1% 4% 3% 2%Stelcape 41% 43% 3% 8% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2%Torm 6% 1% 14% 5% 1% 1% 2% 33% 15% 23%

11

-25-20-15-10-505

10152025

93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 4/04

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

Deliveries Scrapped Lost Converted


Fleet Changes - Last 10 Years

Panamax Fleet Development

290295300305310315320325

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

10

20

30

40$'

000/

day $Day Dirty Spot Curacao-

New York 50KDwct$Day Clean Spot RasTanura-Chiba 55KDwct

The fleet analysis over the following pages is based on Panamax tankers, product carriers and combined carriers that are >=50,000Dwt, built in or after 1970 with a beam

Jan-Apr 2004 Developments Additions 13 Deletions 11

Total 307 Novoship (UK) (12) 305 Trading Fleet 67,836 15.6 Tsakos S & T (12) 1 Storage

20.83 100% Indian Govt (11) 1 Laidup/Repairs8.99 43.2% Stelmar Tnks (11) includes 9 US Flag

123 China Shpg Grp (9) includes 3 shuttle

Size Category Summary Top 5 Owners Activity Status

50-59,999KDwt 49 Attransco Inc (3) 48 Trading54,407 21.5 Brokerage & M (3) 1 Laidup/Repairs2.67 12.8% Petrobras (3) includes 4 US Flag1.44 6.9% Samos SS (3)

32 China Shpg Grp (2)

60-69,999KDwt 154 Tsakos S & T (12) 154 Trading65,594 15.2 Indian Govt. (11) includes 2 shuttle10.10 48.5% Stelmar Tnks (11)1.05 5.0% Novoship (UK) (8)

63 Cosco (8)

70,000+Dwt 104 Waterfront Shpg (6) 103 Trading77,482 13.5 Tesma Hldgs (6) 1 Storage8.06 38.7% Thome (6) includes 5 US Flag6.49 31.2% Novoship (UK) (4) includes 1 shuttle

57 Difko (4)

12

Current Fleet Summary

No. VslsAv Dwt/Age

MDwt % FleetObook % Fleet

No. Owners


Age Distribution

0

10

20

30

40

71 77 83 89 95 01

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

Size & Age Distribution

15435

69

49

048

1216202428

0 1 2 3 4 5

Size Categories ('000Dwt)

Aver

age

Age

Fleet Activity Status

100%

0%Trading

LU/Repairs

Repair

50-5

9

70-7

9

60-6

9

The Panamax fleet consists of 307 vessels (as at May 2004). This includes 51 combined carriers, 1 storage vessel, 1 vessel that is laidup/repairing, 9 US Flag vessels and 3 shuttle tankers.

The analysis (right) splits the Panamax fleet into 3 size categories. By far the largest segment is the 60-69,999 Dwt grouping (48.5% of the total fleet by deadweight). This is the second youngest segment with an average age of 15.2 years.

The youngest vessel segment is the 70,000Dwt+ category (13.5 years). Although contending with its share of ageing tonnage, this sector is the favourite for new investors accounting for 67% of the tonnage on order (89 of 133 vessels on order)

The age distribution graph is skewed towards vessels built in the first half of the 1980s. In addition, there are mini vessel concentrations centred around 1993 and 2000 - while the bulge in 2003 marks the start of a new surge in deliveries. The early 1980s bulge comprises 134 vessels aged 19-23 years (there are an additional 17 1970s built vessels). These vessels represent a significant overhang of tonnage much of which will be scrapped over the next 5 years.

The ownership of the fleet is very dispersed with 123 owners controlling an average of just 2.5 vessels (by contrast the average VLCC fleet comprises 4 vessels)


80+

Most Active Aframax Owners 2003 Figures in no.vsls



Panamax Fleet Ownership Size/Age Distribution

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1981 1985 1989 1991 1993 1997 2002 2004 2005 2006

Average Year of Build

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

OrderbookTrading Fleet

OS

G

Exp

edo

Mng

t

Nov

oshi

p (U

K)

Indi

a G

ovt.

Ple

iade

s S

hipp

ing

Thom

e S

hip

Mng

t

Son

ap

Tesm

a H

oldi

ngs

Tran

spet

rol S

erv.

N.V

Dia

mle

mos

Shp

g

Jaco

b E

.

OM

I Cor

p.

Chi

na S

hpg

Gro

up

Dio

ryx

Mar

itim

e

Gou

land

ris A

genc

y

Tsak

os S

hpg

& T

rdg

Link

Mar

ine

Che

mik

alie

n S

eetra

nspo

rt

Dub

ai S

hipp

ing

Co.

Ele

tson

Cor

p

Del

la G

atta

Chi

na O

cean

(CO

SC

O)

Par

adis

e N

avig

atio

n

Wes

tern

Pet

role

um

Ste

lmar

Tan

kers

Kuo

k S

inga

pore

Ent

erpr

ises

Shi

ppin

gO

lden

dorff

, Kla

us Min

erva

Mar

ine

includes owners with four or more vessels that are trading or on order. The average age of each fleet reflects vessels on order

Dyn

acom

Tan

kers

Par

akou

Shi

ppin

g

Chi

nese

Gov

t

Wat

erfro

nt S

hipp

ing

San

ko S

team

ship

D'A

mat

o Fr

atel

li

Byz

antin

e M

ariti

me

Wah

Kw

ong

Fina

val

Targ

et M

arin

e

Buy Sell Scrap Order Deliver Total

Minerva Marine 6 6Sanko Steamship 6 6Western Petroleum 6 6D'Amato Fratelli 3 2 5Dynacom Tankers 5 5Enterprises Shipping 1 3 1 5Parakou Shipping 5 5Diamlemos Shpg 2 2 4Jacob E. 2 2 4Kuok Singapore 3 1 4Link Marine 3 1 4Tanker Pacific 3 1 4Tsakos Shpg & Trdg 4 4Wah Kwong 4 4Barclay Shipping 1 1 1 3Cosco 3 3Latvian Shipping 3 3Marine Management 3 3Pleiades Shpg Agcy 2 1 3Premuda 2 1 3China P.R. (Govt.) 2 2China Shipping Group 2 2Consolidated Maritime 2 2Dubai Shipping 2 2Eletson 2 2Expedo Mngt 2 2Finaval 2 2Goulandris Agencies 2 2Lmz Transoil Group 2 2Navimar 2 2Omi Corp 2 2Paradise Navigation 2 2Ravennavi 2 2Sonap 2 2Transpetrol Services 2 2Ultragas Naviera 1 1 2Other 20 15 15 5 3 14Total 26 26 20 81 21 130

Summary Orderbook by YardYard Vsls Min Max

Name On Order Dwt Dwt

STX 35 50,930 74,700

New Century 21 73,400 74,500

Hyundai HI 12 70,000 75,000

Dalian 9 72,000 75,500

Hudong 9 62,000 72,000

Onomichi 8 71,000 75,000

Sumitomo HI 8 54,875 61,000

Hyundai Mipo 6 52,800 52,800

Daewoo 5 69,250 69,250

Other 20 50,000 72,700

Total 133 50,000 75,500


Orderbook Summary

O'book Owner Distribution

010203040

Gree

ce Italy

Hong

Kong

China

Japa

nUS

AOt

her

Num

ber o

f Vsl

s

O'book Yard Distribution

0 10 20 30

STXNew Century

Hyundai HIDalian

HudongOnomichi

Sumitomo HIHyundaiDaewoo

Other

Number of Vessels

O'book Size Distribution

28 16

89

020406080

100

50-59 60-69 70-79

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

Panamax Fleet Deadweight Development

50000

55000

60000

65000

70000

75000

80000

85000

70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05

Delivery Schedule

13

3255

34

12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2004 2005 2006 2007

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

On OrderDelivered

The following analysis is based on the Panamax orderbook as at end September 2003. It includes all vessels in the range 50,000Dwt+, and beam

15

Orderbook Listing


Ow ner Ow ner Type Dw t Year Breadth Shipbuilder Ow ner Ow ner Type Dw t Year Breadth Shipbuilder Ow ner Ow ner Type Dw t Year Breadth ShipbuilderCountry Built (m) Country Built (m) Country Built (m)

Byzantine Martime Greece CP 71300 2005 32.24 STX Finaval S.P.A. Italy PC 50930 2005 32.2 STX Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong PC 51000 2005 32.2 STXByzantine Martime Greece CP 71300 2005 32.24 STX Finaval S.P.A. Italy PC 50930 2006 32.2 STX Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong PC 51000 2005 32.2 STXChina Ocean (COSCO) China CP 72000 2005 32.2 Dalian New Finaval S.P.A. Italy PC 50930 2006 32.2 STX Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong PC 51000 2007 32.2 STXChina Ocean (COSCO) China CP 72000 2006 32.2 Dalian New Finaval S.P.A. Italy PC 50930 2006 32.2 STX Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong PC 51000 2007 32.2 STXChina Ocean (COSCO) China CP 72000 2006 32.2 Dalian New Formosa Plastics Co. Taiw an CP 70000 2004 32.2 Universal Maizuru Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong CP 74700 2006 32.24 STXChina Shpg. Group China CP 75000 2005 Dalian Formosa Plastics Co. Taiw an CP 70000 2005 32.2 Universal Maizuru Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong CP 74700 2006 32.24 STXChina Shpg. Group China CP 75000 2005 Dalian Formosa Plastics Co. Taiw an CP 70000 2005 32.2 Universal Maizuru Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong CP 74700 2007 32.24 STXChina Shpg. Group China CP 75500 2006 32.26 Dalian Fratelli D'Amato Italy CP 72000 2004 32.26 Hudong Parakou Shpg. Hong Kong CP 74700 2007 32.24 STXChina Shpg. Group China CP 75500 2006 32.26 Dalian Fratelli D'Amato Italy CP 72000 2004 32.26 Hudong Pleiades Shpg. Agcy. Greece CP 68600 2004 32.2 Koyo MiharaChinese Govt. China CP 75000 2005 32.26 Dalian Fratelli D'Amato Italy CP 73400 2005 32.26 New Century Ravennavi S.P.A. Italy CP 73400 2005 32.26 New CenturyChinese Govt. China CP 75000 2005 32.26 Dalian Fratelli D'Amato Italy CP 73400 2006 32.26 New Century Ravennavi S.P.A. Italy CP 73400 2005 32.26 New CenturyConsolidated Maritime Monaco CP 73400 2006 32.26 New Century Fullship S.r.l. Italy PC 50000 2006 32.2 Shin-A Sanko S.S. Japan CP 54875 2006 32.26 Sumitomo HIConsolidated Maritime Monaco CP 73400 2006 32.26 New Century Fullship S.r.l. Italy PC 50000 2007 32.2 Shin-A Sanko S.S. Japan CP 54875 2006 32.26 Sumitomo HIDella Gatta, I. & L Italy CP 73400 2004 32.26 New Century Kuok Singapore Singapore CP 72650 2005 32.24 Samsung Heavy Sanko S.S. Japan CP 61000 2005 32.26 Sumitomo HIDella Gatta, I. & L Italy CP 73400 2004 32.26 New Century Kuok Singapore Singapore CP 72650 2005 32.24 Samsung Heavy Sanko S.S. Japan CP 61000 2005 32.26 Sumitomo HIDella Gatta, I. & L Italy CP 74500 2004 32.2 New Century Kuok Singapore Singapore CP 72650 2006 32.24 Samsung Heavy Sanko S.S. Japan CP 61000 2005 32.26 Sumitomo HIDella Gatta, I. & L Italy CP 74500 2006 32.2 New Century LGR Navigazione Greece CP 74999 2004 32.25 Hyundai Heavy Sanko S.S. Japan CP 61000 2005 32.26 Sumitomo HIDiamlemos Shpg Greece CP 72000 2005 32.26 Hudong Link Marine Monaco CP 73400 2005 32.26 New Century Schulte Group Germany CP 74999 2004 32.25 Hyundai HeavyDiamlemos Shpg Greece CP 72000 2006 32.26 Hudong Link Marine Monaco CP 73400 2005 32.26 New Century Schulte Group Germany CP 74999 2004 32.25 Hyundai HeavyDubai Shipping Co. Dubai CP 72000 2005 32.25 Hyundai Heavy LMZ Transoil Greece CP 69250 2004 32.2 Daew oo Ship/Mar SONAP Chile CP 69250 2005 32.2 Daew oo Ship/MarDubai Shipping Co. Dubai CP 72000 2005 32.25 Hyundai Heavy LMZ Transoil Greece CP 69250 2005 32.2 Daew oo-Mangalia SONAP Chile CP 69250 2005 32.2 Daew oo Ship/MarDubai Shipping Co. Dubai CP 72000 2005 32.25 Hyundai Heavy LMZ Transoil Greece CP 69250 2005 32.2 Daew oo-Mangalia Stelmar Tankers UK/Greece CP 69250 2004 32.2 Daew oo Ship/MarDubai Shipping Co. Dubai CP 72000 2005 32.25 Hyundai Heavy LMZ Transoil Greece CP 69250 2006 32.2 Daew oo-Mangalia Stelmar Tankers UK/Greece CP 69250 2004 32.2 Daew oo Ship/MarDynacom Tankers Mngt Greece CP 71000 2005 32.2 Onomichi Marine Mngt Serv. CP 74500 2006 32.26 New Century Stena AB Sw eden CP 72000 2004 32.2 DalianDynacom Tankers Mngt Greece CP 71000 2005 32.2 Onomichi Marine Mngt Serv. CP 74500 2007 32.26 New Century Stena AB Sw eden CP 72000 2006 32.2 DalianDynacom Tankers Mngt Greece CP 71000 2005 32.2 Onomichi Marine Mngt Serv. CP 74500 2007 32.26 New Century Target Marine Greece CP 74200 2007 32.2 STXDynacom Tankers Mngt Greece CP 71000 2006 32.26 Onomichi Minerva Marine Inc. Greece PC 50930 2005 32.2 STX Target Marine Greece CP 74200 2007 32.2 STXDynacom Tankers Mngt Greece CP 71000 2006 32.26 Onomichi Minerva Marine Inc. Greece PC 50930 2005 32.2 STX Target Marine Greece CP 74200 2007 32.2 STXDynacom Tankers Mngt Greece CP 71024 2004 32.2 Onomichi Minerva Marine Inc. Greece PC 50930 2005 32.2 STX Target Marine Greece CP 74200 2007 32.2 STXEmpresa Nav. Elcano Spain CP 74402 2005 32.26 Sasebo Sasebo Minerva Marine Inc. Greece PC 50930 2006 32.2 STX Torm, Dampskibss Denmark CP 75000 2004 32.2 Hyundai HeavyEnterprises Shpg Greece PC 51000 2004 32.2 STX Minerva Marine Inc. Greece PC 50930 2006 32.2 STX Transpetrol Serv. N.V. Belgium CP 74100 2005 32.24 STXEnterprises Shpg Greece PC 51000 2004 32.2 STX Minerva Marine Inc. Greece PC 50930 2006 32.2 STX Transpetrol Serv. N.V. Belgium CP 74100 2005 32.24 STXEnterprises Shpg Greece PC 51000 2004 32.2 STX N.J. Goulandris Greece CP 75000 2006 32.26 Sasebo Sasebo Wah Kw ong Shpg. Hong Kong CP 61000 2006 32.26 Sumitomo HIEnterprises Shpg Greece PC 51000 2004 32.2 STX N.J. Goulandris Greece CP 75000 2006 32.26 Sasebo Sasebo Wah Kw ong Shpg. Hong Kong CP 61000 2006 32.26 Sumitomo HIEnterprises Shpg Greece CP 70500 2004 32.24 STX Oldendorff , Klaus Germany CP 72000 2004 32.2 Hyundai Heavy Wah Kw ong Shpg. Hong Kong CP 74500 2006 32.26 New CenturyEnterprises Shpg Greece CP 70500 2004 32.24 STX Oldendorff , Klaus Germany CP 72000 2004 32.2 Hyundai Heavy Wah Kw ong Shpg. Hong Kong CP 74500 2007 32.26 New CenturyEnterprises Shpg Greece CP 70500 2004 32.24 STX Ow ner Unreported CP 70000 2004 Hyundai Heavy Western Petroleum USA CP 52800 2005 32.2 Hyundai MipoEnterprises Shpg Greece CP 70500 2005 32.24 STX Ow ner Unreported CP 70000 2004 Hyundai Heavy Western Petroleum USA CP 52800 2005 32.2 Hyundai MipoEnterprises Shpg Greece CP 70500 2005 32.24 STX Ow ner Unreported CP 72000 2005 Dalian Western Petroleum USA CP 52800 2005 32.2 Hyundai MipoEuroceanica Italy CP 72700 2004 Samsung Heavy Ow ner Unreported CP 75000 2006 32.2 Onomichi Western Petroleum USA CP 52800 2005 32.2 Hyundai MipoEuroceanica Italy CP 72700 2004 Samsung Heavy Ow ner Unreported CP 75000 2006 32.2 Onomichi Western Petroleum USA CP 52800 2005 32.2 Hyundai MipoExpedo Mngt Canada Canada CP 73400 2004 32.26 New Century Paradise Navigation Greece CP 62000 2006 32.26 Hudong Western Petroleum USA CP 52800 2005 32.2 Hyundai MipoExpedo Mngt Canada Canada CP 73400 2004 32.26 New Century Paradise Navigation Greece CP 72000 2005 32.26 HudongExpedo Mngt Canada Canada CP 73400 2005 32.26 New Century Paradise Navigation Greece CP 72000 2004 32.26 HudongExpedo Mngt Canada Canada CP 73400 2005 32.26 New Century Paradise Navigation Greece CP 72000 2005 32.26 HudongNote: CP = Crude/Product, PC = Product/Chemical Paradise Navigation Greece CP 72000 2005 32.26 Hudong


Double Hull Analysis

Panamax Fleet Distribution by Year of Build and Hull Type

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

Single Hull Double Sides Double Bottom Double Hull




Impact of IMO Single Hull Phase-Out

Marpol 13G+H Phase Out Schedules by Year

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

Category 2Category 1

Comparison of Forecast Deliveries and Scrapping 20042007

77

167

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Deletions Deliveries

Num

ber o

f Ves

sels

Ther are just 5 cat 1 Panamaxes still trading. All are due to scrap in 2005

Category 1

In 2007, the residual early 1980s fleet bulge starts to come under pressure with 1980/81 built vessels removed - 1982 built vessels go in 2008 - 1983 built in 2009, and 1984 built in 2010.Note: vessels embarking on the Condition Assessment Scheme (CAS) are able to delay phase-out

Category 2Deliveries include vessels delivered 1H04, current orderbook, and estimate for 2007 deliveries

Scrapping reflects deletions in 1H04, IMO single phase out schedule, and estimated combined carrier scrapping

Fleet Forecast Componentsfigures in number of vessels Additions Deletions Fleet end year

2002 3042003 21 20 3052004 45 13 3372005 55 15 3772006 34 15 3962007 33 34 3952008 33 27 4002009 33 21 4122010 33 52 392

Fleet Forecast Description


Fleet Forecast

Panamax Fleet Size History & Forecast 2004-2010

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

pre70

72 75 78 81 84 87 90 93 96 99 02 05 08

Flee

t Siz

e (N

o. o

f Ves

sels

)2000s Blt1990s Blt

1980s Blt1970s Blt

Pre 70s Blt

Within the forecast, single hull tankers (includes tankers with double sides or double bottoms) are scrapped in line with the new IMO phase-out schedule (December 2003) (note: the Condition Assessement Scheme CAS will allow a trading extension) . Combined carriers are scrapped at 25 years. There is no allowance for double hull scrapping with just 8 vessels 25 years or older in 2010. Delieveries for 2004-6 are based on the actual orderbook, while deliveries for 2007-10 are based on the average deliveries for 2002-2006.

Under the forecast scenario described above, the Panamax fleet will under go relentless fleet expansion from 2004 to 2009. There will be a net fleet gain of more than 100 vessels (equivelent to around one third of the existing fleet) over the next five years - rising from a current fleet (as at May 2004) of 307 vessels to 412 vessels by the end of 2009.

By 2010, the Panamax fleet will have been transformed from an ageing and neglected sector (average age = 15.6 years), to one that is much larger and more modern. By the end of the decade, around 80% (314 vessels) of the fleet will be under ten years of age. There will be little scope for significant scrapping in the period 2010-15 will less than 40 1980s built vessels expected to still be trading in 2010 compared to 179 vessels today.

It should be noted that around 20% (28 vessels) of the orderbook is comprised of 50-55,000Dwt Product carriers. These vessels are effectively a new class of pumped up Handy Product tankers. As such, it may be considered that they exaggerate somewhat the extent of fleet growth in the Panamax sector


Part 1: 2004-2006

Part 2: 2007-2010

Historical Forecast2004-2010

Appendices

19

Panamax Trading Fleet (>=50,000Dwt, beam

20

Panamax Vessel by Vessel Trading Profile



21





22





23





24





25





executive summary · eletson: 9 vessels china shipping group: 8 vessels cosco: 8 vessels china...

Documents