Talking To

Carlos Ghosn – King of the road

by Executive Staff
written by Executive Staff

On his recent trip to Lebanon, Carlos Ghosn, CEO of Renault and Nissan addressed a group of Executive MBA students at the American University of Beirut (AUB). Ghosn who is credited for revamping the Japanese heavy-weight car maker has been spending much of his time between Europe, the USA and Japan. Executive managed to talk to the international business figure.

From your early years at Nissan, you’ve been dubbed by many as a cost killer, how much has this particular skill been put to work at Renault?

In 1999 and after a decade of decline, Nissan, with a $20 billion debt, was on the verge of bankruptcy. It was therefore urgent to cut down costs and I had to make some difficult decisions, that no one had the courage to make before. The situation was very different from when I took over Renault. The company had a sound balance sheet and was far from being in crisis. The Renault Commitment 2009 Plan set cost reduction objectives by business function. Unlike the ones put in place by the Nissan Revival Plan, the aim was not avoiding bankruptcy but improving Renault’s cost competitiveness. I don’t believe there are immutable recipes for good management. Good management is one that is adapted to a given situation and delivers results.

How have Nissan and Renault avoided the trap of corporate cannibalism?

The spirit of the Nissan-Renault Alliance in 1999 was shaped in part by the failure of the Renault-Volvo partnership. Renault learned that when things are imposed by force, they tend to fail. If employees feel that their company is taken over by another entity or that their identity is being absorbed by a greater power, the alliance will again fail. At the beginning of the Alliance, Renault’s behavior was crucial and though Nissan was financially weak at the time, we considered that there were no winners or losers. Executives at both companies were aware of the importance of respecting the identity and self-esteem of all involved parties.

We never tried to merge Renault and Nissan, and we have always been very careful to preserve the autonomy and value the identity of each company, its brands, products and corporate culture. I am convinced that this is a key factor in the success of the Alliance.

You said in an interview with Fortune magazine published in January that the auto industry was facing a difficult environment because of shifting technologies, consumer preferences and increasing oil prices. How is this affecting your long-term strategy at Nissan and Renault?

The automotive industry is indeed facing strong headwinds: competition is fierce, mature markets are stagnant or slowing; commodity prices are increasing for the fourth year in a row… The problem is that our industry has lost its pricing power. When commodity prices rise, we have to absorb the increase, as we cannot pass it on to customers. As a result, the profits of most car manufacturers are on the decline, which bears a risk for the whole industry. An even greater danger than the one inherent to value loss lies in a reduced capacity to invest for the future. This means we must constantly increase our cost competitiveness, improve productivity and expand into new segments as well as new markets to find fresh sources of profitability. Today, a car manufacturer restricting its operations to one region or one market segment is condemned to decline.

But there are also opportunities, such as preserving the environment, which will present a great technological challenge for the coming decades. The Alliance is well positioned to take on this challenge: through cooperation, we can avoid duplicating engineering efforts and resources as well as saving time in the development of new technologies. In such a framework, each partner takes the lead on a specific technology and makes it available to the other. Nissan has already developed hybrids, fuel cells and continuously variable transmissions. Renault has greater expertise in diesel engines, flex fuel, and is also working on electric vehicles.

At an AUB conference held last month, you explained how market capitalization reflects trends in the car industry. As an example, you discussed how the US car market capitalization was divided by half over the last ten years. Given such an unfavorable business environment, why were you so keen on closing the GM deal?

In my opinion, the strategy of extending the Alliance to North America was sound and the discussions revealed an important potential for synergies. However, strategy alone is not sufficient and conditions for a good execution were not quite available. The stakeholders of Renault and Nissan — shareholders, employees and partners alike — perceived the deal more as a risk than an opportunity. I am still convinced that extending the Alliance to a North American partner is a sound approach, but it can only be adopted if we have the means to implement it and stakeholders are motivated.

With net profits slumping at Nissan in 2006, some analysts have declared that you may have overstretched yourself. How do you respond to such allegations?

When results are good, management is considered to be working efficiently. When performance starts to fall, it stirs media criticism — it’s a natural process and I accept it. At the end of the day, your stakeholders are the most important party. The question is, how do they rate your performance? Every year, I face the company’s shareholders and ask for their support. Despite some of the recent challenges, 98.9% of Nissan shareholders voted this year in favor of our management team and the direction of the company. On a day-to-day working level, if you want to have an easy life, don’t become a CEO! Keep in mind not to melt down when faced with obstacles and work with your teams to find solutions and create further value. At this stage in the evolution of the Renault Nissan Alliance, having a dual CEO is helping to accelerate the decision process, which benefits both companies. We have recently announced the building of new plants by the Alliance in Morocco and India and we are introducing advanced new technologies in areas such as diesel engines. As long as I have the support of our stakeholders and believe that my position is adding value to both companies, I will continue to lead the Alliance and both companies.

What were the main reasons behind the Renault-Nissan recent $1 billion investment on a plant in Morocco?

Renault and Nissan lack production capacity for low-cost vehicles. For example, Renault had to postpone the launch of Logan MCV on some markets because it could not produce enough vehicles to meet demand. In Morocco, we were offered a great opportunity to increase our capacities in very competitive conditions as well as obtained a good incentive package. The plant will be located in a free zone of the Mediterranean port of Tangier, near one of the biggest maritime crossroads in the world. It will be dedicated to the production of low-cost vehicles (LCV): such as the ones derived from the Renault Logan platform as well as a new generation of Nissan LCVs. We want to make this plant a benchmark in terms of competitiveness and 90% of produced vehicles will be destined for export.

What new trends do you foresee in the car industry and how does the convergence of computing and communications affect tomorrow’s cars?

There is no doubt in my mind that communication and computing equip­ment will play an increasingly more important role in cars. People want to connect to their network and make their car an extension of their personal environment, using diverse plug-in features. We foresee another trend in the development of specific urban cars dedicated to city life, which will be small, reliable and have no carbon-dioxide emissions. We must also anti-cipate trends for developing countries, where we are currently observing an increase in demand for low-cost, reliable family cars. Between 1999 and 2006, the world auto market increased by 20%, while US and Japanese market levels held steady. However, all growth was witnessed in developing countries. Given such figures, the apparent strategy is to position ourselves in such markets and predict their development.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Comment

The business of doing arms

by Peter Speetjens
written by Peter Speetjens

Most media reported it rather matter-of-factly. Washington over the next decade will supply its regional allies Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and several other Gulf States with $63 billion worth of advanced weaponry in addition to what these countries normally spend on military equipment. According to Condoleezza Rice, this extra weaponry is needed to counter the growing threat of Iran and Syria.

“We have a lot of interests in common: the fight against terrorism and extremism; protecting the gains of peace processes of the past and in extending those gains to peace processes of the future,” stated Rice. Selling arms to bring peace is the ultimate Orwellian double-speak, which by its very nature should raise suspicions that perhaps more is at play.

Let us have a closer look at the alleged threat by comparing some figures: With a 2005 defense budget of $4.9 billion, Iran ranked 32nd among the world’s spenders on military hardware, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, while Syria had a budget of some $2 billion. That same list was topped by the US with a 2005 defense budget of $450 billion — 43% of the world’s total expenditure — which in 2008 is set to increase to $643 billion. The Americans were followed at some distance by China (6%), Russia (6%), UK (5%), Japan (4%) and France (4%). Saudi Arabia ranked 9th with a budget of $20 billion (2%).

The US plus NATO represent 75% of the global budget. Add to that America’s regional allies and their arsenals and you got a lot of firepower, more than a hundred times than that Iran and Syria combined. Now, even if Iran and Syria represent a serious and potentially nuclear threat, these numbers simply do not add up. Other motives must be at play. It may just be that war with Iran is on the horizon, but it could just be business.

There are over 1,000 arms manufacturers worldwide. According to Defense News, the 2006 market leaders were Lockheed Martin with defense revenues of some $36 billion, followed by Boeing ($30.8 billion), British BAE Systems ($25 billion), Northrop Grumman ($23 billion) and Raytheon ($19 billion). Of the world’s 100 biggest producers, more than half are American.

Their influence on domestic and foreign policy has a proud legacy. In his farewell speech on January 17, 1961, US President Eisenhower warned: “We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. We annually spend more on military security than the net income of all US corporations. We recognize the need for this development. Yet, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.”

The market has no morals, so the world’s free market gurus claim, and America’s military industry is an industry as any other, one that seeks to promote its interests, sell its products and increase profits. Thus, to gain influence, weapons manufacturers contribute to the election campaigns of Republicans and Democrats, and individual politicians. They also hire PR and advertisement firms to promote their products and recently convinced US senators to replace the entire F15 fleet with F22 fighter jets, with a price tag of $135 million each.

Take the following fragment, which would suit any neo-con speech, yet stems from a Lockheed Martin promotional video: “Civilized society is under siege. The world is populated by renegade nations and extremist factions willing to use any method available to spread their beliefs. These potential enemies continue to modernize and upgrade their military capabilities.” Conclusion: civilized society must arm itself.

So, here you have an arms dealer mingling in political theory, while in pursue of its commercial interests, which are not necessarily in tune with the well-being of the US or other nations. According to the US Congressional Report “Conventional Arms Transfers to Developing Nations,” the US sold 36% of all conventional weapons to the world’s developing nations, while the five Security Council members plus Germany exported 75% of all arms destined for the developing world.

When the Cold War came to an end in 1989, many thought the arms race would end. Global trade declined from $1 trillion to $800 billion in the mid-1990s, yet today it is well beyond Cold War heights. Interestingly, the increase started way before 9/11 in 1998, when Bill Clinton lifted a ban on arms transfers to Latin America. Why?

“Chile doesn’t need F-16s,” Jimmy Carter explained. “But if Chile spent a large portion of its free budget funds on F-16s, it’s almost inevitable that Argentina would have to buy F-16s just for some future contingency. This would then spread to Brazil. And the first thing you know, South America will be covered with F-16s and other advanced weaponry, electronics, defense techniques to defend yourself against F-16s.” And as soon as everyone has F16s, we need F22s!

PETER SPEETJENS is a Beirut-based freelance writer. 

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Comment

Steps in the right direction

by Riad Al-Khouri
written by Riad Al-Khouri

Damascus has taken yet another step to unpeg its currency from the US dollar by delinking the Syrian pound (SYP) from the greenback and replacing it as a foreign exchange anchor with the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The shift was partly due to Washington’s 2004 sanctions on Damascus, which escalated in 2006 following a ban on the state Commercial Bank of Syria dealing in dollars over an allegation of Syrian connections to illegal activity.

Syria had also moved early this year to distance itself from the greenback by diversifying foreign currency reserves, previously all in dollars, to include euros, sterling, and Swiss francs, with the dollar now representing around half the total held. Given the tension between Washington and Damascus, such a move was on the cards as the Syrian government at the start of had 2006 issued an official circular instructing all ministries and state companies to adopt the euro instead of the dollar for foreign transactions.

However, decisions such as these are not just emotional or diplomatic: it was economically and financially smart for Syria to shift out of dollars, irrespective of the political correctness of the move. Ending the long-standing link between the currencies of the two countries is allowing Syria a more sensible exchange rate while at the same time tweaking Washington’s nose.

A basket of major currencies used in international trade — the euro, the pound sterling, the Japanese yen and the US dollar — defines SDRs. The amounts of each making up an SDR accord with the relative importance of the individual currency in international business. The IMF Executive Board determines the currencies in the SDR basket and their amounts every five years. Current weights of SDR currencies (and hence those Syria uses) are dollars 44%, euro 34%, yen 11%, and sterling 11%. (However, there is an element of flexibility here: for the half-decade to 2005, the first three had been respectively 45%, 29%, 15%, and all could change again after 2010.)

Syrian moves to adopt the SDR basket make economic sense, as weakening links with the greenback help reduce the impact of dollar exchange rate fluctuations against other currencies, which gives more stability to the SYP. With the fall in the dollar, the Syrian pound lost around 10% of its value last year, adding to the costs of imports, especially from Europe. Syria’s Central Bank estimates that decoupling the pound from the dollar would take two percentage points off the country’s inflation rate, which hit 10% in 2006, in part a reflection on the weaker local currency. The IMF website thus gives an estimate for the current year of Syrian consumer prices rising at a rate of 8%, while the forecast for 2008 is an even milder 5%. At the same time, the IMF noted that Syria’s economic performance was strong in 2006, and that the outlook for 2007 is positive. Notwithstanding an unsettled regional environment, the Syrian economic recovery that started in 2004 remains on track: GDP in 2006 benefited from growth in exports and from sizeable inflows of private investment. The IMF’s recent final report on Syria for 2007 projected a rise in real GDP of a respectable 3.3% for this year, while for 2008 the Fund’s forecast for growth is an even healthier 4.7%.

The IMF advises Syria to ensure implementation of a managed float within a tight trading range, helping adjust to changes arising from trade liberalization and the transition to a market economy. On the other hand, it should be interesting to watch how the central banks of Arab countries with currencies pegged to the dollar and political ties to America can move away from over-reliance on the greenback. Jordan is an example, as a number of economic and political considerations keep the kingdom wedded to a fixed exchange rate that pegs the Jordanian dinar to the dollar. Yet as the greenback continues to depreciate, this point is now the subject of discussion: Marwan A. Kardoosh and Anne Mariel Peters writing recently in Amman’s Jordan Business magazine grant that the Jordanian dinar’s peg to the US currency “has been important to overall macro-economic stabilization and the development of certain sectors.” However, they quickly add, “in the face of an increasingly weak dollar as well as creeping inflation from other sources, perhaps it is time to re-evaluate Jordan’s choice of exchange rate regime.” As Jordanian prices rise and the value of reserves falls, can the kingdom learn from Damascus? On that score, I am personally not holding my breath. Meanwhile, the irony is that an American bluster has pushed Syria in the right direction: towards better monetary management.

RIAD AL KHOURI is the Director of MEBA wll, Amman; and Senior Associate of BNI Ltd, New York City.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
By Invitation

At a Crossroads: The Middle East transport and logistics industry

by Fadi Majdalani & Ulrich Koegler
written by Fadi Majdalani & Ulrich Koegler

The Middle East has historically been a trade route for merchants, prized for its connections to both Europe and Asia. This history has laid the groundwork for a vast transportation and logistics network that is slowly emerging in the region and could be a significant source of economic growth for many years to come. The Middle East’s geographic location and excellent accessibility by air, land, and sea put it in a prime position to serve as a trade hub.

The trade volume between Europe and Asia is likely to continue to grow, as Asia has become a key production and manufacturing region for the Western world. Traditionally, air freight carriers used to stopover in the Middle East to refuel, halfway along this trade lane, and will continue to do so to maximize freight loads. However, volume growth on the Europe-Asia trade lane has increased the need for shippers to use larger vessels and apply more advanced logistics concepts. With product cycles speeding up, demand becoming less predictable, and companies managing their stock more closely, sea freight increases the risk of carrying outdated items. As air freight remains too expensive for most goods, the option of a conversion from cost-effective sea to air freight while en route becomes more significant. The Middle East is a natural location for sea-to-air conversion.

Beyond its potential as a global hub along the Europe–Asia trade lane, the Middle East can establish regional transport and logistics hubs serving northern and central Africa, Pakistan, and the Caucasus. The region has equal proximity to all these markets and very good connectivity by road and short sea transport. These markets currently lack access to competing regional centers, such as Europe and South Africa, and cannot yet afford the required infrastructure investments. Furthermore, as companies optimize their supply chains, it makes sense for them to establish a single regional distribution center in the Middle East for all of these markets. Increasing production capacity also underscores the need for a strong regional logistics sector.

Public Policy Steps for a Strong Industry

As Middle Eastern governments embark on the development of the transport and logistics sector to drive economic growth, it should be clear that the opportunities are not equally available to all countries. Hence, governments should consider four key building blocks for developing a successful transport and logistics sector strategy.

1. Choose a strategic play for the sector with appropriate infrastructure. The correct choice of one of the three strategic plays described hereafter needs to be based on a thorough and honest assessment of the qualifying factors. The global multimodal transport and logistics hub strategic play is the most demanding option, requiring a preferred geographic location and huge investments to create infrastructure incorporating a world-class airport and port zone. It also demands an economic environment that attracts foreign direct investment; the availability of a large free zone around the port-airport infrastructure; highly competitive handling charges; and living standards that accomodate a large expatriate community. However, there are very few truly global hubs: We predict that there is an opportunity to establish two global hubs in the region, and one will likely be Dubai.

The regional logistics and distribution hub strategic play requires similar elements but is less demanding in terms of overall size and multi modality. However, services and processes must adhere to the same high standards; the infrastructure must simultaneously provide good connections to global hubs and exporting countries, as well as excellent links to neighboring regional markets, via a strong road and short sea infrastructure. A few traditional gateways to the Middle East such as the Nile Delta, the Red Sea ports, Kuwait’s coastal area, and the northern shores of the Gulf could develop into regional hubs.

Finally, countries that cannot meet the needs of a global or regional hub play should focus on the development of domestic transport and logistics services.

2. Adjust policies and regulations to promote sector development. These should promote foreign direct investment, provide a liberal economic environment, and allow for full foreign ownership of the respective local entities.

3. Optimize government services to meet the demand of the logistics sector. The key government services required by the logistics sector fall into three areas: business and equipment licensing, regulatory oversight and competitive regulation, and customs services. Optimization of government services in the first two areas should be part of a broader economic development program to promote and foster entrepreneurial activity. Transactional customs services should be automated as much as possible and seamlessly integrated into the logistics service providers’ order management systems.

4. Promote the development of national transport and logistics champions. In most countries in the region, the industry structure of transport carriers and logistics service providers is still highly fragmented and often not developed.

The development of a strong domestic transport and logistics sector is a strategic imperative for economic development in the Middle East. The countries that succeed at establishing sustainable networks can expect to see increased economic activity, improved industry competitiveness, and growth in job opportunities. Those that do not, however, may find themselves falling by the wayside.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Comment

Musings from Arab America

by Norbert Schiller
written by Norbert Schiller

During our holidays this summer we were fortunate to be able to stay with my wife’s extended Lebanese family on both the east and west coasts of the United States. It had been almost six years since we last visited, and I must say that staying in an Arab-American household lessened the shock of fitting into the American way of life; a kind of decompression chamber if you will. Behind closed doors nothing really changed; the family was as tight-knit as ever and if it wasn’t for the green lawn outside the window and the lack of blowing horns and shouting in the streets we could have all been sitting in Beirut.

Both Lebanese-American families we stayed with were forced to leave during war. The husband of my wife’s cousin, who is originally Palestinian, remembers when in 1948, at the age of eight, he was forced to flee his village in northern Palestine after the Arab armies advised the inhabitants to leave because “the Jews are coming to take your land.” He made his way to southern Lebanon by holding onto the tail of his uncle’s donkey. On the east coast, my wife’s brother and his wife fled Lebanon for the United States in the mid-1980s, during one of the darkest chapters of the civil war.

Obviously, for my wife and her family, the first few days were consumed by relaying and absorbing Lebanese and Diaspora news: the physical changes taking place in Lebanon (the pulling down of the grand old building around the corner that once belonged to so-and-so) and how much of the country has been restored a year after the war with Israel.

However, unlike previous visits, the solid opinions that my wife’s family once held true were now blurred and the issues watered down.

When we first traveled to the States in the early days of our marriage 15 years ago, Lebanon was always on the forefront of every conversation. One misplaced word or train of thought could trigger an all out major debate on Lebanese politics that would result in phone calls to friends and family across America and even a call to Lebanon if it meant proving a point. Now that has all changed.

It’s not hard to explain this waning interest. American press coverage of the Middle East is something you have to actively seek out. Even with the 500 plus stations available to most cable subscribers, if you don’t have your own satellite hook up, you are not privy to all the international news stations like CNN International, BBC World, Al Jazeera, and LBC International. The newspapers inundate readers with local news, followed by a bit of national news and then a blurb here and there from the rest of the world. If there is something from the Middle East, it will probably be about Iraq and even then there is a good chance it will have a local angle. 

In the past, I remember always seeing a second, more international, newspaper lying around — the New York Times or Los Angeles Times — but now, with time, I notice that my wife’s family are slowly becoming more interested in the news that affected them on a daily basis. Even when we were visiting, they tended to veer away from the Middle East if some local issues, like the rise in crime, a garbage collection strike, or the bridge collapse in Minneapolis there was more anguish — “Haraam, they were just going home from work” — than for any car bomb outrage in Iraq.

One family member told my wife that she felt that her generation had “missed all the boats.” They had missed Lebanon’s golden era, caught the war and then had to endure all the insecurities of living as immigrants in the United States. And then came 9/11 with all that feeling of not belonging and being seen as outsiders. Her only consolation is that her children will hopefully feel more grounded and not live forever in search of a homeland.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Money Matters

by Executive Contributor
written by Executive Contributor

Ithmaar Bank posts 130% in H1-07 net profits

Ithmaar Bank, a Bahrain based global investment institution, announced a 130% increase in its H1-07 net profits to $65.09 million up from $28.7 million for the same period last year. As a result of their expansion, Ithmaar experienced a tripling of operating profits from $23.7 million in the first half of 2006 to $71.1 million in the first half of 2007. Income from investment in financing amounted to $97.8 million, while $25.4 million was generated in fees and commissions and $23.1 million was generated from sale of investment securities. Total assets, including funds under management stood at $5.1 billion at the end of last June, compared to $4.4 billion at the end of last year. Ithmaar is growing at a rapid pace and is one of the most dynamic financial institutions in the region covering a wide range of Islamic financial services and investments. Ithamar’s wholly-owned Ithmaar Development Company (IDC) has made considerable progress in several major projects with the Kingdom of Bahrain and internationally.

Emaar ranked in top 10 of S&P Index

Standard and Poor’s (S&P’s) ranked Emaar Properties PJSC, the UAE-based real estate developer, in the Top 10 of IFCG Extended Frontier 150 Index for frontier equity markets. Attaining the highest weight of 5.59% in the index reflects Emaar’s strong regional presence and growing international recognition. The Extended Frontier 150 Index plans to accommodate the needs of increasingly sophisticated investors willing to expand in developed and emerging markets. This year, S&P Rating Services and Moody’s Investor Services assigned Emaar A- and A3 ratings respectively, with steady outlook reflecting the company’s strong financial profile.

IMF forecasts strong growth for Syria in 2007

In its latest report, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) highlighted the strong economic performance of the Syrian economy in 2006 and has forecasted a positive outlook in 2007. According to the report the economy’s supply responsiveness, the tighter credit policy and the fiscal discipline have contributed in tightening inflationary pressures caused by the large demand shocks from Iraqi investors. The report assessed that Syria needs to maintain a strong external stability over the medium run, which can be achieved through strong fiscal adjustments, accelerated structural reforms and exchange rate flexibility. The IMF regarded the Syrian private banking sector promising despite the possible drawbacks it might face in developing reforms. In addition to that, vital action is needed for the state banks to attract the accumulation of non-performing loans and enhance competition. Finally, Syria’s economy is in need of progress in developing market-based instruments for monetary control and should reduce the excessive risk taking as well as dollarization.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
North Africa

Tunisia  Emirati Dreaming in Tunis

by Executive Editors
written by Executive Editors

Bilateral relations between the UAE and Tunisia are set to expand with leaders from both countries being keen on promoting joint-investment projects to enhance social and economic relations.

On his recent visit, HH Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, vice president and prime minister of the UAE, expressed that the enhancement of bilateral relations is a starting point “towards wider avenues of mutual economic, technological and tourism cooperation.” He also added that such cooperation is a significant step in “embodying the deep fraternal relations and the common history of our two countries and peoples and building new bridges between the eastern and western Arab countries.”

The most recent joint-investment agreement between the two countries was part of a ceremony held during the visit of Sheikh Mohammed to Tunisia. Together with Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the two leaders laid the foundation stone of a $14 billion real estate and investment development set to provide housing for half a million people. The mega real estate development project on the southern lake of the Tunisian capital is a joint venture between Sama Dubai, the international investment arm of Dubai Holding and the Tunisian government. The development will cover some 850 hectares and offer all the services of a satellite city, including retail and entertainment centers along with apartments, luxury hotels, a wide range of recreational and sports facilities, and up market housing.

Called the Century City and Mediterranean Gate, the development is intended to serve as a business hub, with office space for more than 2,500 international firms, with an emphasis on those in the financial sector. Businesses located there will benefit from state of the art communications infrastructure and impressive architecture. The centerpiece of the project will be two massive towers.

Additionally, the new city will play a major role in the country’s tourism industry, boasting 14 high class hotels and resorts, leisure and sporting facilities and a marina as part of the design.

Century City will be the single biggest investment project in Tunisia’s history, and will make Dubai the largest foreign investor in the country. The $14 billion price tag eclipses TECOM Investments and Dubai Investment Group’s acquisition of a 35% stake in Tunisie-Telecom in 2006 — valued at $2.25 billion.

According to Mohammad al-Gergawi, Dubai Holding’s chief executive officer, Sama Dubai expects to raise investment in Tunisia from $3 billion to $18 billion in the near future.

The potential for Century City to attract further foreign investment through companies relocating to the vast business district, drawn by the opportunities presented by a new city of up to half a million prospective customers, is undoubtedly welcomed by the Tunisian authorities.

State projections predict the work will add 0.6% to the country’s growth rate for a period of up to 15 years, and provide jobs for 130,000 people during the construction phase, pleasing statistics considering that unemployment is running at more than 14%, according to official figures.

Agreements signed between the state and Sama Dubai specify that most workers on the project will be Tunisians and the company will provide them with specialized training.

Al-Gergawi said actual work on the project will begin in the next few months. “The scheme is very important so it will be done in stages,” he commented. “It requires 10 years to be finished.” Al-Gergawi stated that Tunisia had been chosen as the site for the development by Sama Dubai because the country has potential to become a promising regional economic center, thanks to its position as a gateway to many other destinations. The growing services sector and the favorable investment regime were also strong attractions, he told a press conference in early August.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
North Africa

Morocco  Linking the continents

by Executive Editors
written by Executive Editors

The construction of an undersea tunnel linking Morocco and Spain has been on both countries’ agenda for over 25 years now. Today, the idea is closer to materializing than it has ever been before.

After rounds of geological tests and feasibility studies run by specialist independent geotechnical consultants from the Swiss engineering company Giovanni Lombardi, the project looks to get a go ahead by the end of 2007. The cost of this project has been estimated to exceed $13 billion and initial studies by engineers forecast a project length of up to 25 years.

It is predicted that the tunnel could carry 9 million passengers and 8 million tons of freight annually. There is a potential for boosting the economies of both nations as well as mutually improving tourism and trade opportunities. Currently, Moroccan exports to EU countries account for 73.8% of total export revenues and generate $12.76 billion (or 22% of current GDP) annually. In return, Morocco receives 65.1% of its total imports from the EU, the bulk of which are transport equipment and machinery, which contribute to Morocco’s automotive industries. Additionally, agricultural exporters would be set to gain a strong advantage from this transport development, being able to send some of Morocco’s more delicate exports such as flowers and tomatoes by train instead of ship.

The growth in the number of European tourists to Morocco has given further impetus to ambitions to link Spain and Morocco across the Strait of Gibraltar.

Morocco’s tourist industry witnessed a successful first half of the year with EU figures showing over 2.26 million visitors from January to June 2007, representing a 7% increase in year-on-year terms. As such, the country is keen further to improve the accessibility of its tourist sites by moving ahead with the Gibraltar tunnel project.

European tourists

According to the Moroccan Ministry of Tourism, European arrivals to Morocco account for 83% of 2007’s arrivals to date, with French visitors leading the pack with 873,000 visitors in the first six months of 2007, an increase of 4% on last year. Visitors from Spain and Britain accounted for 479,000 and 175,000 visitors respectively, with British tourist arrivals recording a 43% increase as a growing number of no-frills airlines such as easyJet and Ryanair are making the country more accessible with flights to Marrakech, Casablanca and Fez. Germany, Belgium and Italy are also important markets, each accounting for approximately 100,000 visitors. The three most popular tourist destinations have recorded growth in the number of visitors in the last six months; Marrakech has seen a rise of 12%, Casablanca recorded a 9% rise and the coastal resort of Agadir saw a 3% more visitors than in the same period last year.

The construction of the proposed Gibraltar tunnel is a joint venture between government agencies Société Nationale d’Études du Détroit (SNED) in Morocco and Sociedad Española de Estudios para la Comunicación fija a Traves del Estrecho de Gibraltar (SECEG) in Spain. The tunnel would consist of a 39 km passenger, car and freight rail line running across the strait connecting the cities of Tarifa and Tangier. Its deepest point will be 300 meters.

The next step will be to consider a number of logistical challenges. Even though the distance across the Strait of Gibraltar is 14.5 km, the challenges posed to engineers by a Morocco-Spain tunnel are far greater than challenges facing engineers during the “Chunnel” construction between England and France, which lie 32 km apart at the Strait of Dover. The water is deeper; nearly 1000 meters at the shortest route across the strait, compared with just 61 meters in the English Channel. Another challenge is the texture of the earth. The first test diggings over 10 years ago revealed that the soft earth near Tarifa is not suitable for building a structure of this type. Recent tests have re-confirmed this and so Cape Malabatta has been selected as the entrance point to Morocco, after which the tunnel will continue to Tarifa. Additional concerns include securing the tunnel against human trafficking between Africa and Europe and whether the there will be a sustainable flow of goods and people in both directions given the economic disparities between the two continents.

Yet leaders of both countries are keen on proceeding. Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has said that he is fully committed to the project. According to the minister the tunnel would “greatly speed growth, development and prosperity” on both sides of the Mediterranean. The goal behind the construction is to create “an integrated Euro-Mediterranean economic area” and possibly lead to developing the transport network further to include a link between Marrakech and Europe.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
North Africa

Algeria  Taking out Trabendo

by Executive Editors
written by Executive Editors

The part-privatization of Algeria’s ports to major operator Dubai Ports World (DPW) has been hit by a series of rolling strikes by trade unions. The potential unrest stems from talks the government is holding with DPW over the company possibly taking a 50% stake in the container terminals at the ports of Algiers and of Djen Djen, in the eastern province of Jijel.

Algiers port has reached saturation point and will need considerable investment to extend it. However, the stumbling block at the moment is the plan to include the potentially highly lucrative Djen Djen port, and disagreement over the issue of bringing in a foreign owner. Some also point to the possible disquiet of those involved in the “trabendo” economy, or contraband imports, as looking to scotch the deal to preserve their lucrative, if illegal, niche.

Djen Djen’s port is something of an oddity, having been built to serve a steel plant that was never constructed. However, it has developed as a major point for container and dry cargo transport (notably grain) abroad. The purpose-built port also benefits from very good land transportation links, as well as deep water piers accessible to ships of up to 120,000 tons.

Local media have reported that DPW made a $70 million bid for the operation of the Djen Djen port, coupled with a $120-150 million investment program to upgrade it. In June, the transport ministry announced that negotiations were making good progress.

“Dubai Ports World took into account the principal requests of the Algerian side at the time of the first round of negotiations, which was held in Algiers on June 12,” the statement said. “We will be able to advance.” The deal seemed to be likely to be finalized by year’s end, officials have been reported as saying.

However, the umbrella union Coordination Nationale des Syndicats des Ports d’Algerie (CNSPA) has objected strongly to the plans to change the port’s ownership and their employer and threatened to block the deal.

One source of discontent is the government reneging on a pledge made by the minister for investment promotion, Abdelhamid Temmar, to tender the sale internationally rather than moving immediately to negotiate directly with DPW.

CNSPA has a membership of 14,000 across all of Algeria’s 10 most important ports, giving it a great deal of leverage in the situation, as has been show in the past. Strikes by CNSPA-affiliated unions in October 2005 against government privatization and labor restructuring plans left 100 ships abandoned by workers. The Port of Oran alone, where 15 ships were left stranded, hemorrhaged $130,000 a day during the industrial action. In May of this year, another anti-privatization strike shut down almost all Algeria’s ports, causing losses of up to $2.1 million in a single day.

Guermache Abbes Maamar, the secretary-general of the Algeirs port trade union, has said that opposition to the proposed deal with DPW was in the national interest and not only an issue of workers’ rights.

Maamar questioned the wisdom of “giving away” container activity, which generates 70% of the port’s receipts, in return for the proposed investments DPW has put on the table. The unions agree that Djen Djen is in need of an overhaul, but Maamar proposed that the government work with its port management authority Entreprise Portuaire d’Alger to develop the nation’s ports, rather than using foreign firms.

“We can do everything between Algerians: to buy gantries and all the equipment to improve the output. We cannot release sovereignty on the ports,” he added.

To break the current deadlock, it has been suggested that the unions should be involved in future privatization negotiations to ease the tension and distrust. However, it seems that the CNSPA is unlikely fully to embrace partial privatization to DPW. Meanwhile, private sector companies involved in trabendo activity at the ports are also against the deal. Many are believed to be involved in illegal practices which they fear the Emirati company might eliminate if the deal goes through.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
North Africa

Algeria  Building the Gas Bridge

by Executive Editors
written by Executive Editors

Algeria, the world’s fifth largest gas producer, is supplying around a quarter of the EU’s gas imports, and is hoping to expand further into that market. Its valuable position is firming with pipelines under construction to southern Europe and liquefied natural gas (LNG) deals with northern Europe. And although Russia remains the major gas supplier for the EU, Algeria’s flexible gas sector and geographical location are factors playing in its favor.

On July 12, Algeria and the EU finalized an agreement dealing with territorial restrictions, allowing companies of EU member states that import Algerian gas the right to resell it either within their own domestic markets or to third-party countries.

In return, Sonatrach, Algeria’s state oil and gas company, will have the right to a share of the profits earned by European companies, for LNG contracts only. Sonatrach will also be allowed to sell LNG shipped by tanker directly on the European market.

The deal will consolidate Sonatrach’s position as one of the main suppliers of natural gas to the EU, with Algeria behind only Russia and Norway.

Deepening the Algeria-EU relationship

Chakib Khelil, the Algerian minister of energy and mines, said the agreement was a further step toward deepening the strategic relationship between Algeria and the EU. “Algeria supports the establishment of Sonatrach as an active player in an open, transparent and competitive EU gas market,” Khelil said at a signing ceremony in Brussels, where the final details of the deal were hammered out after lengthy negotiations.

The EU’s Competition Commissioner, Neelie Kroes, also attended the ceremony. “The agreement reached constitutes a major breakthrough in our relations with one of Europe’s most important suppliers of natural gas and eliminates an important obstacle for the creation of a single EU-wide market in gas,” said Kroes.

The agreement with Algeria was essential for the EU, having launched the fully deregulated energy market within the bloc on July 1, allowing clients to choose their preferred suppliers of electricity and gas, rather than be tied to state operated utilities that continue to dominate energy markets in some EU member states.

Algeria agreeing to allow the unrestricted sale of its gas to third parties means that its present and future contracts are now in keeping with the EU’s new open market policy. Algiers had long held out against the ending of destination restrictions, fearing the move could result in wholesale reselling of its gas without any benefits coming its way.

Algeria’s long running dispute with Spain, over restrictions on how much of the gas piped through the Medgaz gas pipeline Sonatrach is allowed to sell directly on the Spanish market, appears headed to the courts.

The Algerian company has been limited to selling no more than 1 billion cubic meters of gas annually in Spain, despite being the largest single shareholder in the Medgaz project, with a stake of 36%. Sonatrach hoped to sell up to 3 billion cubic meters of gas a year.

At the beginning of July, Khelil said that Algeria would lodge an appeal against the Spanish energy watchdog’s ruling to limit Sonatrach’s sales.

“We will lodge an appeal with the higher authorities in Spain …  as well as the European Commission,” Khelil said. “What we are asking is to be treated like any other operator, Spanish or otherwise, whether for the distribution of gas or for the shares in the Medgaz project.”

Algeria and Spain are also involved in international arbitration over Sonatrach’s demand that the price of Algerian gas imports be increased in two stages by 20%, to keep the tariff in line with world prices. At the present rate, Algeria stood to lose around $300 million annually, according to Khelil.

Only days after the agreement was signed, Algeria moved to strengthen its energy production infrastructure, announcing more than $4 billion worth of construction tenders for new processing facilities.

In mid-July, Algeria awarded French firm Total the $3 billion tender to construct and operate a cracking steam facility with the capacity to produce 1.4 million tons of ethane annually. The plant will also produce polyethylene and ethylene glycol, with Sonatrach funding 49% of the project and Total the remaining 51%.

The same day, Sonatrach and a consortium of foreign firms, including Mitsui of Japan and Kuwaiti company Qurain, were awarded the contract to build and operate a $1 billion methanol plant with a projected output of 1 million tons a year. Again, Sonatrach will hold 49% of the project, with the other members of the consortium combining to take the rest. With so many projects in the pipeline, the future of the petrochemical industry in Algeria seems to be brighter than ever.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail