Electronic Container Tracking Survey

Transcription

1 Electronic Container Tracking Survey NEW YORK LONDON TOKYO HONG KONG

2 Electronic Container Tracking Survey abiresearch.com 2004

3 Published 4Q ABI Research PO Box Hamilton Avenue Oyster Bay, NY USA fax abiresearch.com ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this document may be reproduced, recorded, photocopied, entered into a spreadsheet or information storage and/or retrieval system of any kind by any means, electronic, mechanical, or otherwise without the expressed written permission of the publisher. Exceptions: Government data and other data obtained from public sources found in this report are not protected by copyright or intellectual property claims. The owners of this data may or may not be so noted where this data appears. Electronic intellectual property licenses are available for site use. Please call ABI Research to find out about a site license.

4 Question 1: Please Categorize Your Organization Systems Integrator/Turnkey Provider Commercial Telematics Service Provider Software Developer Transport/Logistics/Supply Chain Consultant Cellular/Satellite Network Operator RFID Hardware Manufacturer Cellular Hardware Manufacturer GPS/Satellite Hardware Manufacturer Seal Manufacturer Container Manufacturer/Lessor Shipper/Carrier/Port Operator 24% 9% 17% 9% 5% 17% 6% 7% 3% 1% 2% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 1

5 Question 2: What Is the Primary Focus of Your Company? Government & Regulatory Compliance Loss Prevention 26% Supply Chain Optimization 38% Counter- Terrorism 2

6 Question 3: Where Is Your Company s Primary Headquarters? Africa 2% Asia-Pacific 15% South America 1% Europe 23% Middle East 3% North America 56% 3

7 Question 4: Who Do You See as Your Primary End-use Customer? Public Sector (nonmilitary) 14% Military 8% Hazardous Materials Transport 9% Precious and High- Value Cargo 13% Refrigerated Goods Transport 9% Large Retail Chains 10% Manufacturers 10% Shippers, Carriers 15% Ports & Container Terminals 12% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 4

8 Question 5: Please Rank the Leading Market Barriers (1 = Largest Barrier) 20% Lack of Standards 19% 28% Technology Immaturity 19% 23% 27% Industry Fragmentation 20% 22% Prohibitive Costs 13% 15% Third Secondary Primary Lack of Apparent ROI 20% 19% 20% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 5

9 Question 6: What Do You See as the Basic Annual Subscription Fee for Cellular? < $50 19% $50 - < $100 23% $100 - < $150 $150 - < $200 13% $200 - < $ 250 8% $250 or Greater 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 6

10 Question 7: What Do You See as the Basic Annual Subscription Fee for Satellite? < $50 13% $50 - < $125 22% $125 - < $175 13% $175 - < $225 14% $225 - < $ 275 9% $275 or Greater 29% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 7

11 Question 8: What Do You See as the Basic Annual Subscription Fee for RFID? < $20 $20 - < $40 31% $40 - < $60 $60 - < $80 20% $80 or Greater 13% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 8

12 Question 9: Do Your Solutions Use and/or Are They Compatible with the Following Technologies: 20% 16% 14% 12% 11% 10% 8% 8% 6% 7% 6% 4% 2% 0% RFID-Microwave RFID-UHF RFID-HF RFID-LF UWB 5% 12% Wi-Fi Satellite Messaging 9% Cellular Messsaging 15% 16% 10% GPS Bluetooth 9

13 Question 10: Please Describe Your Focus on Container Tracking MEDIUM As a side project 30% HIGH Core Market 62% LOW Looking to possibly enter 8% 10

14 Question 12: Is there Anything Else You Would like to Highlight About the Market for Electronic Container Tracking? (Some Highlights) "The market does not appear to be ready to act until there is strong government legislation or strong business cases made. Because the chain of custody changes many times along the supply route, the question as to who should pay for new technology remains unanswered." "The requirement is global and the solutions must either adapt to the multi-platform wireless networks, or create a new, dedicated, and standardized network for container and cargo tracking." "Big market, no standards, and many big players; however, the market is still open to all." "Lack of mandates by government prevents widespread adoption of container tracking solutions. Since a carrier's adoption of any container tracking solution will inherently add cost in a commodity-priced market, they perceive that adoption will make them less competitive. Carriers need to become better educated about the ROI prospects of container tracking in relation to better asset management and control, but this is creates a "chicken & egg"-type syndrome, since no company has adopted a solution as of yet. There is a better solution; for example, chassis tracking inside and outside a terminal can accelerate customer fulfillment, boost asset utilization, reduce labor costs, reduce administration costs, and more, while also offering FREE container tracking when chassis are carrying containers." "A container costs less than $1500 and can spend most, if not all of its time, sitting in a yard. Technology solutions that rely on continuous energy or cannot lie dormant are of little use. Moreover, if it is settled in a stack, a container has little chance of obtaining a suitable fix from GPS. In short, forget about anything related to satellite or cellular communications, or derivatives thereof. However, while in transport or settled in a stack, the container has ready access to platforms: ships, trains, or trucks that can support all communications options; therefore, they are ideal as routers for backhauling data to a central processing point." "The value chain for container tracking is very distributed. Many different sectors derive value from tracking containers: container lessor, goods manufacturer, shipper, government/customs, insurer, buyer, inter-modal transporter, etc. all have a stake in this. The company can figure out how to develop a value-proposition that somehow delivers an incremental value (for an incremental cost) to all these 11

15 independent, but related sectors, will succeed. Container Tracking is more of a business development challenge than a technical challenge." "Other interesting motivations for container tracking: avoidance of non-reported containers (for example, waste containers), avoidance of signature at the delivery note (a tag or GPS data can be used instead). Here, laws are missing, which enables clients to use this in lieu of a signature." "Each country appears to have independent efforts in developing a container tracking solution. There is a need for an international coordinated effort, otherwise there will be too many incompatible systems required, thereby will increasing container shipping costs." A new transportation infrastructure is needed; however, it must be cost-effective. "UHF tagging looks like the most promising technology, but worldwide standardization efforts have yet to be accomplished." 12

16 ELECTRONIC CONTAINER TRACKING SURVEY About ABI Research ABI Research was founded in 1990 to assist manufacturers of wireless semiconductor components in understanding and entering new markets. As tech-driven emerging markets proliferated during the 90 s, ABI Research expanded its analytical coverage to a broader base of manufacturers and service companies participating in the technology market revolution. In addition to being relied upon for strategic insight by over 500 clients annually, our analysts opinions appear in the major media sources of the world and hundreds of industry specifi c trade publications. ABI Research is committed to reinvestment in research infrastructure enhancing knowledge sharing and speeding information fl ow among our research teams and the industries we cover. This strategy continues to improve the value of our relational database initiatives, gleaning research effi ciencies in our core quantifi able data while simultaneously expanding the access and insights of our key research groups. This translates into meaningful and substantive research for our clients. In working with ABI Research you enjoy the longevity of a large research house with the service level commitment and industry-specifi c knowledge of a boutique. Related Research Offerings Container Security Tracking Applications of GPS, RFID and Cellular Technologies for Supply Chain and Homeland Security The United States Government has taken major steps to ensure the security of cargo entering its borders. Yet, there still are no legislative requirements for any type of electronic cargo seal or container tracking device. The market eagerly awaits standards, both to reduce the risks of terrorism, and, from a business standpoint, to reduce costs through supply chain management. This report examines and evaluates evolving solutions and technologies for global electronic container tracking, including: RFID, GPS, cellular, satellite, Ultra Wideband, Bluetooth, barcode, and optical character recognition. The key market drivers are identifi ed, with a thorough examination of the relevant issues and market players for each major region. click to learn more ABI Research