Strategisk analyse af Uni-Tankers A/S

Peter Flou-Jensen

Student thesis: Diploma thesis


The main object of this report is to define strategic aspects and implementations that can strengthenthe competitiveness of Uni-Tankers.An analysis of external factors concludes that Uni-Tankers relies on an improved macro economy inorder for the freight market to gain strength and make ship-owning profitable. Oil-prices are asignificant driver on the international political scene, but are also directly influencing the variablecosts of Uni-Tankers. Further it is discovered that the legislation carried out by IMO aims to reducegreenhouse gasses from cargo ships. ECA’s where Uni-Tankers’ fleet trade at a regular basis, willbe subject to SOx reductions. However engine producers have come up with solutions that can beimplemented on ships and insures that ship-owners meet the tightened requirementsThe small-tanker market in Europe is highly influenced by the economic crisis within the EuropeanUnion. In addition, the shipping market has been subject to over-supply of vessels since thefinancial crisis evolved in 2008. Factors that make it difficult for ship-owners to create profits. Uni-Tankers however is developed to become a top-5 ship-owner measured in number of ships, and hasbeen able to purchase most of its fleet at post 2008 market-prices, making it slightly moreaffordable.In 2012, Uni-Tankers opened three new offices in Turkey, France and USA, which enables theorganization to develop local markets via customers and business partners. The culturalunderstanding which a local Uni-Tankers worker possess, should make creation of new relationseasier. Especially the growing markets of Turkey, Black Sea, Caribbean and South America isfound to require a greater understanding of local cultures. Hofstedes dimensions (Henry, 2008)pointed out that by opening offices in USA, Turkey and Denmark, Uni-Tankers is now offeringtheir customers a wider aspect of services because it possess a multicultural organization.The present ECA rules in Europe and USA, can potentially create problems for Uni-Tankers whenships with small bunker capacity is crossing the Atlantic while consuming 180 cst. IFO. A financial study on the attractiveness of implementing scrubber for part of Uni-Tankers fleetshows that under given circumstances it can be a good investment. Due to the current LSFOrequirement in ECA’s, investment is not recommendable before 2015 because the price differencebetween low-sulphur and high-sulphur bunkers is limited.For the sister-ships SELANDIA SWAN and JUTLANDIA SWAN, payback time is approximately4 years, by that time the ships are only 10 years old. Calculations are predicting savings to bearound USD 5 mil. by the end of a 10-year investment period. Calculations for the vessel FIONIASWAN have shown that even though its 3 years older, payback time is reasonable, and predictedsavings is just less than USD 5mil. by the end of a 10-year investment period. Another calculationbased on the vessel LESSOW SWAN, that only trades about 60 % of the time in ECA, shows thatimplementing scrubber will also generate savings in bunker cost within its lifetime.The financial study is a key indicator that Uni-Tankers can benefit from scrubbers and improvetheir competitiveness.Ultimately the LNG market is found to be inadequate for immediate transformation of Uni-Tankersfleet from traditional fuel to LNG. However the alternative has much less negative impact on theenvironment, and the distribution is expected within few years to reach most of Uni-Tankers presentgeographical markets. It raises the question whether Uni-Tankers should consider potentialnewbuildings running on dual-fuel systems or solely LNG systems. Based on corporate governancetheory, it is discussed whether an energy company would choose LNG-based in favor of traditionalfuel-based sea transportation if the cost is the same. Potential competitive advantage could beobtained.

EducationsGraduate Diploma in International Business, (Diploma Programme) Final Thesis
Publication date2013
Number of pages72