South Korean shipbuilders report 32 per cent decline in new orders from January to May
New Delhi [India], June 6 (ANI): South Korean shipbuilders witnessed a decline of 32 per cent on a year-on-year basis in new orders from January to May, according to shipping industry tracker Clarkson Research Services, as reported by the Korea Herald.
During these five months, Korean shipbuilders reported a total of 3.81 million compensated gross tonnage, representing 24 per cent of the global market, second only to China, which led with 7.86 million CGT, or 49 per cent.
This decline was attributed to selective order-taking, as companies like HD Hyundai Heavy Industries, Hanwha Ocean and Samsung Heavy Industries were prioritised as they deal with high-value-added vessels such as liquefied natural gas carriers rather than container ships.
Their docks are currently occupied with orders scheduled for delivery over the next three years.
From a broad perspective, this drop is also a reflection of a sharp downturn in the global shipbuilding market.
Industry sources noted that many shipping companies are delaying new orders amid uncertainties in global trade and falling freight rates, driven in part by ongoing geopolitical tensions between the US and China.
The Shanghai Containerised Freight Index, which measures shipping rates, dropped from over 3,000 in June last year to around 1,200 in May 2025.
Although the index has recently risen, experts believe this is a short-term bump due to temporary US tariff deferrals on Chinese goods.
As a result, South Korean shipbuilders have seen their order backlogs shrink by 8 per cent, or 3.09 million CGT, compared to last year. By early June, HD Korea Shipbuilding & Offshore Engineering had met just 38.7 per cent of its annual order target of USD 18 billion, and Samsung Heavy Industries had reached only 27 per cent of its annual order target of USD 9.8 billion. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
How did things get from bad to worse between Donald Trump and Elon Musk? A step-by-step guide
A no-holds-barred and very public blow-up between the world's richest man and the president of the United States has had social media agog in recent days, with each making serious accusations against the other. And while tech billionaire Elon Musk appears to have cooled the spat somewhat – deleting some of his more incendiary social media posts about Donald Trump – the president still appears to be in no mood to make up, warning Musk of 'very serious consequences' if he backs Democrats at the mid-term elections in 2026. Tensions erupted over Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' (OBBB). The OBBB proposes extensive tax cuts which could add roughly USD 3 trillion (AUD 4.62 trillion) to the US national debt. After stepping down from his role as advisor to Trump, Musk criticised the OBBB as 'disgusting abomination' that would 'burden America [sic] citizens with crushing unsustainable debt'. Trump returned fire, suggesting 'Elon was 'wearing thin', I asked him to leave […] and he just went CRAZY!'. In a dramatic escalation, Musk responded by calling for Trump's impeachment. Musk also tweeted allegations that Trump was implicated in the Epstein files related to child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. He has since deleted those tweets. Why has the much-hyped 'bromance' between Musk and Trump suddenly ended? And what was the basis of their alliance in the first place? Like many billionaires, Musk had previously been hesitant to get involved in frontline politics. He says he voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020, but claimed in 2021 'I would prefer to stay out of politics'. In early 2024, Musk was still claiming to be politically non-aligned, suggesting he would not donate to either presidential campaign. This apparent neutrality ended following the attempted assassination of Trump at a July 2024 campaign rally, with Musk immediately endorsing Trump. In reality, Musk's conversion to the MAGA movement long predated the assassination attempt. Musk's hyperactive Twitter/X account shows a steady radicalisation. Across 2020-2024, Musk engaged with accounts sharing MAGA and far-right conspiracy theories. These include the antisemitic Great Replacement Theory, and the related South African white genocide conspiracy. Musk's posts also show the obsession with opposing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies characteristic of the MAGA movement. After endorsing Trump, Musk spent USD 288 million (AUD 444 million) supporting Trump's election and appeared at campaign events around the country. Musk's support for Trump was both ideological and pragmatic. From tax cuts to immigration restrictions to opposing DEI, there were clearly many ideological commonalities between Musk and Trump. There were also clear practical benefits for both men. Trump gained the financial backing of the world's wealthiest man. Musk gained not only unparalleled access to the US president, but also a role leading the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Early reporting on the second Trump presidency noted the omnipresence of Musk, who at one point moved into Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort to be close to the president. However, observers were sceptical about the potential effectiveness of DOGE, and Musk's claim it would save the government USD 2 trillion (AUD 3.02 trillion). In the early months of the Trump administration, Musk cut government programmes and employees at a remarkable rate. The USAID programme was particularly hard hit, as were the Department of Education and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. As the spending cuts picked up pace, Musk began to attract more controversy. Critics questioned the apparent power wielded by the unelected billionaire. Musk's ties to the far right were also in the spotlight after he appeared to perform two 'Roman salutes', which many observers believed to be a Nazi salute. Musk's apparent rampage through government did not last long. As Trump's executive appointees assumed control of their departments, Musk and DOGE experienced increasing resistance. After a series of fractious cabinet meetings, Trump reportedly reduced the power of DOGE in March. Political attention was also clearly affecting Musk's businesses. The negative publicity has significantly damaged the Tesla brand, leading to declining sales around the world and repeated falls in Telsa's share price. On May 1, Musk announced he would be leaving DOGE, claiming the department had saved the government USD 180 billion (AUD 277 billion) in spending. This number is likely an exaggeration, but still falls well short of his original target. Musk has learned a harsh lesson in politics – that the complexities of government resist simple reform and cannot be easily rolled back in the way a CEO might slim down a company. For Trump, his manoeuvring of Musk appears to be another smart political move. As the public face of DOGE, Musk bore the negative rap for early government cuts and chaos. Having used his money and reputation, Trump dispensed with Musk as he has with so many advisers and appointees before. Musk departed his role in a muted White House ceremony, where Trump thanked him for his service and presented him with a ceremonial 'golden key' to the White House. However, behind the public show of civility, tension was brewing over Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill. Trump and Musk had originally claimed the USD 2 trillion (AUD 3.02 trillion) in DOGE savings could be used to fund a substantial tax cut. With the efficiency savings not eventuating, Musk worried the OBBB would significantly increase US public debt. Unable to convince Trump or other Republican legislators, Musk took to X, launching a 'Kill the Bill' campaign that ultimately led to his incendiary showdown with Trump. For his part, Trump has belittled Musk, suggesting Musk only opposed the OBBB because it cut subsidies for electric vehicles. Though the subsidy cuts will affect Tesla, Musk has previously supported eliminating subsidies. Musk's anger at the OBBB is more likely driven by the realisation he has been played by Trump. Trump has used and discarded many other powerful figures in his chaotic political career. Musk has more power than most, and might be able to strike back at Trump. Yet, with his public reputation and brands already tarnished, Musk would be ill-advised to pick further fights with Trump and his adoring MAGA movement. Accordingly, Musk has indicated over the weekend he is open to a détente. Tesla investors will no doubt be relieved if Musk makes good on his pledge to step back from politics and return to his businesses. More concerning are the prospects for democracy. With wealth and power continuing to concentrate in a handful of billionaires, voters appear reduced to the role of viewers forced to watch the reality TV drama unfold. Though Trump appears to have won this round of billionaire battle royale, whatever happens next, democracy is the real loser.
Mint
28 minutes ago
- Mint
China's rare earth export curbs are India's wake-up call
The US-China trade war has opened a fresh front, now impacting Indian industry in a big way. China's curbs on exports of rare earth magnets—processed from rare earth elements (REEs)—have disrupted supply chains, particularly in the country's automobile sector. The development also underscores why India must urgently reduce its dependence on China by ramping up domestic exploration and refining of its own rare earth reserves. In April, Beijing imposed export restrictions on seven REEs in retaliation for US tariff hikes. Importers were forced to navigate a complex licensing system, triggering delays and shortages worldwide. Indian firms have faced stiffer restrictions than many others, Mint reported last week. China dominates the global rare earths industry, mining 46% of REEs and refining 74% as of 2024, according to the International Energy Agency. These 17 metals are essential for everything from electric vehicles and fighter jets to smartphones and MRI scanners. Given the high costs of extraction, China has built a commanding lead in the sector over decades. India, despite having the world's third-largest rare earth reserves—estimated at 6.9 million metric tonnes—mines only a small portion. The country has remained heavily import-dependent, with China as the primary supplier. India's position This isn't the first time China has used REEs as a geopolitical lever. In 2010, it briefly cut off exports to Japan during a territorial standoff. The latest curbs serve as a timely reminder for India to move faster in securing its access to these critical materials. Some steps have been taken. Under the National Critical Mineral Mission (NCMM), launched in January 2025 with a ₹16,300 crore outlay over seven years, REEs have been identified as one of 30 critical minerals. Their production and import have been made a national priority. In March, for the first time, the REE sector was opened to private investment. A Reuters report noted that the government plans to introduce fiscal incentives for domestic production in response to the current disruption. But more must be done. A 2020 Exim Bank working paper identified key gaps. Chief among them is India's limited refining and processing capacity, which has long hamstrung efforts to tap domestic reserves. Greater investment in R&D is also needed to develop alternatives for critical minerals, the report said. India must also look outward—by enabling joint mining ventures and helping Indian firms acquire assets abroad. This strategy has been adopted by countries like the US and Japan. As the global push to reduce Chinese dominance in the sector gathers pace, India could emerge as a viable alternative supplier—though the transition will take time. China's own dominance took nearly two decades to build after it began prioritizing REE development in the 1980s. What next? Demand for rare earths is set to soar as the global economy pivots toward decarbonization and electrification. According to the IEA's Critical Minerals Outlook 2025, demand stood at 91 kilotonnes in 2024 and could nearly double to 178 kilotonnes by 2050. Clean energy will be the main driver, with REE demand from this segment expected to rise from 20% today to over 33% by 2050. 'Growing demand for permanent magnets, particularly from EVs and wind power, boosts the need for magnet rare earths," the IEA report noted. Read this | EV industry, government struggle to find alternatives as China throttles rare earth magnet supply While demand is set to rise sharply, the biggest vulnerability remains China's dominance—and its willingness to weaponize supply chains. Australia is expected to emerge as a key supplier over the next decade. Meanwhile, India and Central Asian nations—including Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan—have expressed interest in joint exploration of rare earths and other critical minerals. Such efforts may not yield immediate results, but could gradually chip away at China's grip over the global supply.
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Ericsson wins multi-year 4G, 5G NOC managed services deal with Bharti Airtel
NEW DELHI: Swedish telecom gear maker Ericsson has won a new multi-year network operations center (NOC) managed services deal from India's Bharti Airtel , deepening the partnership between the two telecom companies. Under this agreement, Ericsson will enable intent-based operations, powered by its centralised NOC, to manage Airtel services across 4G, 5G non-standalone (NSA), 5G standalone (SA), fixed wireless access (FWA), private networks, and network slicing, the companies said in a joint statement Monday. This partnership will see Ericsson manage Airtel's pan-India network through its NOC while scaling FWA and network slicing across the country. Commercial terms of the deal were not disclosed. Network slicing is one of the top applications of the fifth-generation or 5G networks, enabling telcos to offer a virtual network layer for specific bandwidth needs, such as AR/VR content streaming, mission-critical communications, or autonomous vehicles, based on pre-defined service level agreements (SLAs). In India, Airtel along with Reliance Jio offer their respective commercial 5G fixed broadband services to customers, with the use case seeing a rapid uptake nationwide in recent months. 'We are excited to enhance our strong collaboration with Ericsson as we pursue our goal of creating a future-ready network that delivers an exceptional experience for our customers. We believe that these innovative technologies will empower us to meet the growing data demands of consumers in a digitally connected India,' said Randeep Sekhon, chief technology officer (CTO), Bharti Airtel. 'By leveraging Intent-Based NOC Operations, we will enable Airtel to unlock wider service diversification to meet customer needs, thereby enabling new revenue opportunities for Airtel,' said Andres Vicente, head of market area Southeast Asia, Oceania and India, Ericsson. Ericsson and its Finnish rival Nokia already have a 5G radio access network (RAN) deal with Airtel, Jio, and Vodafone Idea (Vi). India's third-largest telecom carrier had also awarded a 5G RAN deal to Korean Samsung. Earlier this year, Ericsson won a 5G Core deal from Airtel, which will eventually lead to the upgradation of Sunil Mittal-led telco's network architecture to Standalone (SA). As part of this agreement, Ericsson will deploy its Signaling Controller solution within Airtel's network, and will introduce its SA-enabled Charging and Policy solution to strategically improve Airtel's 5G monetisation efforts, enabling the development of new business models.
