Intervista Video Chat con Paolo d'Amico TG1 del 25 giugno 2013

No, absolutely not. The shipowner is called shipowner because in the distant Middle Ages he armed the ships with cannons as well, but clearly it has nothing to do with the current shipowner. Confitarma is the trade association of Italian shipowners. Practically, in our Confindustria, it is the representative of the government and with the unions of all our community. We are a fleet of 19 million tonnes, which has practically more than doubled over the last 12 years. In the last ten years, Italian shipping has invested 37 billion euros in new ships. 60 percent of the Italian fleet is less than ten years old. These are roughly the numbers of the Italian flag.

Regarding shipowners, I can say that we directly provide 80,000 jobs and 110,000? In direct, we are a sector of 190,000 people, while the sea, as you said before, the federation covers about half a million people. The trend, however, is a substantial part of the sector. So 190,000 employees, direct and indirect. Certainly the moment is extremely difficult for us, as it is for everyone. Normally we anticipate the cycles a bit, in the sense that since we are very present in the transport of raw materials and very present with containers in the transport of finished products, we see and feel the cycle normally a year earlier, both in fall and rise. What is clear for us was a moment of immediate restriction of demand, that is, from the drama of the Lehman collapse to today, the fleet on one hand has reduced considerably, on the other hand, since there were previous orders, where the system was growing, the new ships that had been ordered arrived. So there was a moment, and there still is on certain sectors, of excess supply, a minor trauma. We are slowly moving towards rebalancing. Which sectors are particularly affected at this moment? The dry bulk sector, ships that transport coal, iron ore, grain, and also tankers are in excess. The only truly driving sector is cruises, which continue to churn out notable growth numbers, and we will talk about that later. You anticipated the question I wanted to ask: there is an index, the trend of cargo ship charters, which is in a certain sense an economic indicator. Have you seen a recovery from this crisis, a light at the end of the tunnel? For example, today we talk about China. China has raised rates, it is slowing down, but China continues to set records for iron ore imports, still 60-65 million tons per month, so it's not a small thing. And it continues to do so. I feel that regarding our crisis, it is more due to an excess of supply than a lack of demand. That is, the volumes are there, but there are too many ships, and this is creating big problems. The fact that volumes are there should be somewhat comforting, because it means that globalization, which has grown in this decade, is stabilizing trade. In other times, there would have been a vertical collapse of volumes because the world was a much smaller village. Today the world is a much larger village, more evolved, with Africa coming very soon. So I would like to give a certain signal of optimism. Finally, I had some data. I don't know if you can confirm: the average cost of a charter was 50-60,000 dollars per day in the best times, dropped from 60,000 dollars to 8,000 dollars per day in the worst period, and now it is rising to around 15,000 dollars. Yes, it depends on the ecology and type of ship, but basically the index is.

We live in a totally transparent market, so the solution is that the market works on its own. The old ships will disappear, the new ones will remain, then everything will restart and the cycle will be seen.

Well, let's say we suffer from this partly, but I wouldn't say it's our main problem because we are structured globally. Italian shipping companies, like all shipping companies in the world, are structured in an absolutely global way because we cover various markets. We are not limited to Italy; we are almost extraterritorial. So this type of problem affects us only to a certain extent. In fact, I'd say that on the hiring of young officers on board ships, we are facilitated, and we are continuing to hire. We are a bit countertrend on this. And I suppose that the next question? Perhaps the next question is about large-scale shipping, and we say it doesn't affect us. Let's read it: Gilardino asks: 'The increase in VAT that should be introduced worries you?' Yes, it worries us for the small cabotage, which also exists and is an extremely important sector of Italian shipping. It is practically the connection between the Gulf of Naples, Naples Capri, Naples Ischia, Naples Procida, and all the minor islands. There, VAT, which was once deductible, is no longer, so the shipowner becomes the final consumer, and this will clearly hit directly.

Well, this is a question that works a lot. We are capital-intensive. For the common users, to give some figures: when we talk about a ship, we talk about a ship of 40, 45, 50,000 tons, we talk about a general cargo ship new today around 32-33 million dollars. So it's easy for a company with 10 ships to have around 600 million dollars gross of investment mobilization. So yes, banks are, for us, we consider them our majority partner because if they weren't there, we couldn't work. They have continued to give us credit in this period, but we must be honest. There are two sayings: 'It never rains but it pours' and 'When it rains, the umbrellas close.' Or rather, the banks have also been overwhelmed by the crisis. In fact, the crisis comes partly from them, being a financial crisis. So they had credit restrictions themselves. We work a lot in dollars. The Italian banking system at a certain point had a dry spell because no one was giving credit to the banks themselves. So they in turn could not pass it on. On the other hand, 'It never rains but it pours' - credit always goes to those who have the guarantees to give. But normally those who have the guarantees don't need credit, and those who need credit in crisis don't have the guarantees. But at the same time, we can't blame the banks because they also have to do their job. Very good, I must say.

Yes, no. Let's say that first of all, to face this competition, for a good part of the merchant marine, we now build ships in China itself. So in terms of ship acquisition, we are at the same identical level. Labor is not a problem for shipping. For the so-called 'ball' tankers, always tankers and large ships, labor is never a determining element for these purposes. The country? But we are also protected by our systems. Certainly labor weighs heavily where there is a very high intensity of crews, like on ferries, passenger ships, and bars. But we do not fear competition from these countries. We are in a position to be able to assume some hope.

Perhaps it was unpredictable. There were no signals of the crisis. It was unpredictable. What really caused it was the failure of Lehman Brothers, so we couldn't know that. Only someone like Ponzi knew. But we can predict? Our industry is highly cyclical. We know very well that when things are high, it seems trivial, but we know very well that when things are high, in the end they go down. There's nothing to do, for one reason or another. After periods of great expansion, normally for reasons that are not foreseeable, in fact in 2007 no one came up with the reason why the crisis had to come. We only knew that at some point there would be a crisis because of continuity, because the economy is like that. When I started working, I started as an apprentice in '73, it was just before the energy crisis of '73. The world was all rosy, then the Arabs tripled the barrel in a month, and the world collapsed. Mindful of that fact and then of other crises that followed, we are always more or less prepared for the worst. And I must say that a good part of the shipowners have done so. A small parenthesis that came to mind now while you were telling about when you started this job: how does a young person approach the world of shipping? It is quite mysterious. In fact, it's not a world you belong to. Let's say in the south, from a city, an island city, so with a maritime tradition, and you find yourself in it. Luckily I found myself in it, not because I'm from a city by the sea, even if my origin is Salerno, but because I belong to a family, I was born into it. So tradition exists. Now, with specialization, the sophistication of the system, we are looking for increasingly prepared and academically qualified human resources. Not only that, we normally count a lot on hiring seafaring personnel. Often we take former seafarers and bring them to our offices because they clearly have experience at sea which is extremely important. The world of the sea is a world with its own peculiarities, and you cannot draw a parallel between sea and land because it doesn't exist. And unfortunately, this is what I have tried to explain often to our rulers: we need a department of the sea, at least a body that knows how to group all the maritime functions of the state itself, because it is a typical fact, it needs capable people. The state already has them but must put them under one umbrella, all people who deal only with this.

Look, the ruling of the antitrust authority was aimed at the so-called 'concert' regarding how they increased prices, not the fact that they increased tariffs, which are two completely separate things. On the issue of the concert, I frankly can only say one thing: in 2011, the four companies hit by this ruling lost 100 million euros. In that same year, Tirrenia closed its balance sheet in balance after receiving 65 million in contributions. In 2012, the Sardinia region made an experiment, tried an experiment with the charter of ferries, the cost of which, I'm told, the loss was around 20 million euros for the summer season alone. The absurd thing is that the Sardinia region set up this operation in competition with another company that was anyway subsidized by the state, because Tirrenia was in competition with Tirrenia itself, which already had subsidies. What does all this mean? That actually the high ferry prices are not... First of all, it's the first time I hear of cartels among people who lose money. Cartels are between those who make money, not those who lose it and see to make even more. And this is not the case. Secondly, the region's experiment and Tirrenia's balance sheet show that we are actually at extremely precarious levels. So hypothesizing or thinking that an infrastructure that has a 'bottier' like Alitalia on the chair and on Sardinia can survive, considering also the price increases that have occurred, the increase in fuel costs, and the automatic increases in crews. I would like to underline that cabotage only employs Italian seafarers, and port costs and various other technical-nautical services. I fear that I frankly do not see a possibility of tariff reduction, also because these licenses cost hundreds of millions of euros, they are not things that cost little. And I also feel that, considering the tariff per mile, Italian ferries are profoundly and significantly cheaper than any other ferry system in the rest of Europe. So, in short, you are saying I defend them? I frankly didn't understand this thing about the antitrust authority very well, in fact I was also surprised by the speed with which it came out. However, it seems to me that there was talk of increases of 65 percent. Yes, but that... They lost 100 million the year before, they had lost as many, they were going down, down, down, massacre, and they tried to recover. The fact that it happened more or less at the same time is normal. Tariffs, normal prices, increase when demand rises, and demand rises in those three months, the holiday period.

Thank you, she is absolutely right. For us, the constant change is exhausting. It takes us on average a couple of months to start having talks with the new government, and by then we are impoverished too. It's not that they are all the same, they are politicians doing their job, but we have to explain every time who we are, what we do, why we don't do what we do, what wealth we create. So yes, without a doubt, it is the reason why I hope this government lasts a while.

These are incidents that are different cycles. Two are clamorous. Yes, it's a good question. We have to... we are faced with two different problems. Costa Concordia: well, only Captain Schettino knows why he was there? There is a trial. Exactly, because we didn't understand it, we didn't understand it, the Costa people didn't understand it, nobody understood it. I hope he understood it, but it's so absurd that it's absolutely insane. But we are faced with an act of very high responsibility, which is very rare. On the other hand, if you take the entire history of Italian passenger navigation, there has never been a similar disaster. We have to go back to the Andrea Doria, so we're talking about 1956, which was a collision with another ship, but at least that could be justified. This one we simply don't understand. As for Genoa, it's a bad thing. I frankly don't want to be controversial, but for me, the tower should not have been there, period. It was built in the water, and it's a miracle in my view that this accident didn't happen before. However, it does seem that the maneuvering speed was... it was less forceful? But the docks, after all, are the fenders of ports, one uses them for that, because ships always hit the docks in all ports of the world. But that tower had nothing at the dock, it was completely in the water. If it had been three or five meters inside the dock, everything studied, it wouldn't have happened. But when it was designed, you were not involved at all? No, no, it wasn't part of the plan, so it doesn't surprise me. Let's say maybe one should have thought of that.

Yes, regarding Concordia, I feel that the route of the Concordia, the disaster route, was never a route of Italian shipping. Otherwise, at Giglio we would have a cemetery of ships, not just the Concordia. So this doesn't affect us. As for Venice, I understand because seeing these beasts enter is indeed a sight. I feel that to reassure our writer, the canal on which the ships navigate is very narrow, and only one ship can pass. Not only that, the ship meets all the safety requirements that are required today. Not only that, in Venice there is a tugboat, but let's say that everything fails, the tugboats and the engine turns off, the ship will go aground before it ever reaches San Marco because the draft is such that it will run aground much earlier. So the risk of hitting the city, I feel, cannot happen. We are in agreement with the port authority of Venice for the excavation of a new canal that enters from Malamocco and passes behind. It is clear that passengers will lose the attraction of being able to take a photo of San Marco. Like, if the most important photo in the world, everyone wants to be photographed there, it could cause a decrease in presence. But I understand very well this invasion, and I believe that a plan will be adopted that could also be to send the ships to Trieste rather than to Venice, and then load the cruise passengers on buses and bring them by bus. Also because, President, I don't know, but the photo from the ship doesn't necessarily bring benefits to the economy of Venice. No, no, it's the presence of passengers that brings a notable financial flow to the city. What leaves me a bit perplexed is that the port authority wants to adopt a tax, let's call it, of 5 euros per passenger to finance this dredging work, and normally putting taxes on tickets to passengers leads to a drop in traffic. But Venice deserves it, absolutely, even more.

Here, I think we return to the demolition of the Costa Concordia. My answer: no, it makes no sense. But on the other hand, it's the same... So he agrees with Gigi 77, 100 percent absolutely. Which other ports could handle it? Once we really put it on platforms, put it more or less in safety, I would try to send it to Turkey because they know how to demolish ships there, and without much fuss. Not only that, they even pay for it, meaning the demolition yard pays the shipowner, whereas in this case it would be all at cost, and not a small one. Moreover, we haven't demolished a ship in this country, I believe, for 40 years. In this country, ships are dismantled before... La Spezia?

I agree with him on this, certainly. Certainly tourism is one of our resources. I would like to remind him that cruises are one of the few aspects of tourism that is growing, because the tourism industry is not doing so well. But it is clear that I believe Italy will go more and more in that direction, as it will with craftsmanship and many other things. But heavy industry, truly heavy, in the long term, will disappear from this country.

Let's say it has a logic, yes, no, apparent. In the sense that if the price of oil is high, it means that demand for oil is strong, but you have to see how many ships are there in supply to do that transport. It goes back to what I said before: the problem is more a problem of supply of space than demand.

Here the breath broadens to the world. Clearly we are worried about this circumstance because both Brazil and China are two giants of the world, not only as countries but as markets. So we are very driven by their demand for goods, both raw materials and semi-finished products. The reason why all this happened is important. It has to be said about Brazil that 70% of the young people who are on the streets are graduates, under 25 years old. So I think it is indicative that there is a class of young people who want to have something more from this economic boom, which evidently was not redistributed. I don't see what the recipe proposes.

But let's say that is perhaps the minor damage. The greater damage is the crews that were held hostage for many months, and clearly these people are not exactly well-behaved, so you can imagine what it means to fall into their hands. The biggest problem for us has always been the relationship with our people, to give security. So our biggest problem, which we have partly solved but still need to finish solving, is to create the countermeasure, that is, protection. We created protection first with a first decree that we developed with the Ministry of Defense, for which a convention was born that the marines can escort the ships on board. We are talking about 2011. In fact, since we started putting them on board, many incidents have been resolved. I would like to say that there have been many times when marines intervened. Unfortunately, we only know about the Indian case of the marines, but many times marines intervened and saved the ships, without causing losses, in many cases even just showing their weapons, the pirates fled. So the first part of the countermeasure, I would say, is working. The big limitation we have is that the Ministry of Defense cannot cover the entire geographical area and the origin of all routes. Let me explain better. We are talking about an area that goes from the Gulf of Aden to India and the entire Indian Ocean. The Italian presence of marines is mainly in Djibouti, so ships that pass through the Suez Canal coming from the Mediterranean can benefit from the coverage of the marines where they are available. But if, for example, ships come from South Africa, South Africa has not given agreement to Italy to position marines there, because all the positioning of these military personnel is a consequence of agreements between governments, and not all have given it. So, for example, all ships coming from South Africa and going towards the Persian Gulf are absolutely not covered. To solve this aspect, we asked and I would say obtained, but we are missing a circular that we still lack, the last penny to do it, but I obtained the authorization to use private contractors because they are more scattered, better positioned from a logistical point of view, and that would give us total protection in the Indian area. Let's keep armed guards, which, with all due respect, are not security guards as they say, they are not the security guard of the bank, they are military personnel who are trained, who come from combat experience, notable sum. But this only solves the problem for now. We are also having a big problem in the west, that is, in the Gulf of Guinea, Nigeria, where unfortunately the countries in the area do not allow the use of foreign security guards or even foreign military personnel. They use partly local military, and we have to see what happens.

Well, that is an appropriate question. In the sense that certainly, let me explain better: the Filipino technical nautical institute, when it graduates the student officer, this officer has already done some embarkations and has already been certified for various functions, which the Italian has not been certified. That is, our school has remained a bit behind, in fact quite behind. And the ITS (Higher Technical Institute), which is the academy of the sea, was created precisely to make up for this lack. But the ITS is always done with the presence of the state, so it's not that the state was absent, it did its part. And the academy must be considered an integral part of the technical nautical institute. You see it. So, the path has changed. Now there are technical institutes, higher technical institutes that provide, after the diploma of the nautical school, the old diploma of the nautical school, now it's called another way, but they also provide to put in line the young officers and to be able to be qualified for command. How many are there? We know that out of about 1,500 officers who come out, maybe 20 percent go to sea. Not because we don't want them, but because they don't want to go. They don't want to go because it's too hard. But it's not even that dramatic nowadays. It was once, when you embarked for three years, but today you embark for four months. So I don't understand this nostalgia. They are looking for something else. There are many, many trades that Italians have abandoned.