Earlier today, Panjiva announced an exclusive relationship with Sinosure, the leading provider of information on the financial health of Chinese companies. Now we’re moving quickly to provide you with the tools necessary to assess the health of your Chinese supply chain.
Specifically, I’m excited to tell you about Panjiva SinoScreen — a diagnostic tool that will help you quickly and inexpensively assess the health of your Chinese supply chain. The Panjiva SinoScreen report will provide you with an assessment of 20 Chinese suppliers, based on Panjiva‘s analysis of import data and Sinosure‘s analysis of credit data. Why two data sets? No one data set is perfect, so triangulation using multiple data sources increases the likelihood that you’ll reach an accurate conclusion about which of your suppliers stand the best chance of surviving the downturn.
Between now and May 31st, Panjiva SinoScreen is available for a one-time fee of $5,000. Check out a sample of Panjiva SinoScreen.
To order your customized Panjiva SinoScreen report, contact us at +1 212 763 2125, or fill out this short form.
Over the last few years, I’ve heard many complaints about the lack of reliable information on companies around the world. However, I’ve heard one complaint more than any other: “There just isn’t good information on the financial health of Chinese companies.”
Today, I’m pleased to announce that Panjiva is tackling this problem head on, by providing access to information on the financial health of 8 million Chinese companies.
How are we doing this? Via an exclusive deal with Sinosure. Let me explain…
For the last few years, we’ve been looking for credible information on the financial health of Chinese companies. To be sure, there are lots of organizations offering information on Chinese companies — but credible information on financial health? Tough to find.
About a year ago, we met Sinosure. Sinosure is the organization that was originally set up by the Chinese government to provide export insurance to Chinese companies. In order to correctly price this insurance, Sinosure had to develop an approach to assessing the financial health of exporters — and get access to the information needed to fuel these assessments. Which brings me to why we concluded that Sinosure can provide the best possible perspective on the financial health of Chinese exporters:
- Access to the most information — By virtue of their government ties, Sinosure has access to an unbelievable array of data sources, providing Sinosure with a variety of data points on any individual company.
- Reliance on their analysis for decision-making — At Panjiva, we’re by nature skeptical of data sources — because every data source has a bias. Interestingly, that’s what makes Sinosure so compelling. Their bias is to get the analysis right. After all, if they get the analysis wrong, they’re going to price insurance incorrectly and lose money. At which point, the Chinese government loses money.
Is Sinosure data perfect? Of course not. No data set is. That’s why we advocate looking at multiple data sets anytime you’ve got an important decision to make. My next post will walk you through how Panjiva‘s making this kind of triangulation as easy as possible.
In the meantime, I want to welcome Sinosure to Panjiva‘s extended family. In the months ahead, our U.S. customers will be able to get access to Sinosure reports on any Chinese manufacturer — only through Panjiva.
New data from the Panjiva research team. Interestingly, our analysis of the U.S. shipping data through March seems to back up U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s recent claim that “the decline in world trade may be abating.” Specifically, from February to March, there was a slight increase in the number of companies shipping to U.S. customers (up to 120K in March, versus 118K in February). That’s the good news.
The bad news is that there is still a tremendous amount of risk in the system. At the end of March, as usual, we took a look at significant manufacturers, and we found that 30% of these companies qualified for the Panjiva Watch List, as a result of suffering a 50% or greater decline in volume shipped to U.S. customers during the most recent three month period, versus the same period a year ago.
Also, 40% of significant U.S. buyers have an active relationship with at least one Panjiva Watch List manufacturer.
The comparable numbers for February were similar: 29% of significant manufacturers were on the Panjiva Watch List, and 40% of significant U.S. buyers maintained an active relationship with at least one Panjiva Watch List manufacturer.
Bottom line… There’s some chance we’ve hit bottom, but it’s quite clear that we’re not remotely out of the woods yet.
Yes, I’m finally twittering: http://twitter.com/panjiva
And, as a consequence, I’ve become more concise. So, in response to Jason Busch’s SpendMatters post on Alibaba’s shortcomings and what the future holds for buyer-supplier marketplaces, I’ll simply say, “Amen.”
Check it out: http://www.spendmatters.com/index.cfm/2009/4/22/Alibaba–Is-China-Really-Still-the-Top-Supplier-to-Global-Buyers
Last week, President Obama warned that the United States is unlikely to return to its role as a “voracious consumer market.” If he’s right, the effect on global manufacturers is likely to be profound. Panjiva’s latest analysis of February shipping data illustrates this point.
From January 2009 to February 2009, in just a single month, the number of global manufacturers shipping to the U.S. dropped 10%, from ~131K to ~118K.
In case you’re wondering if it’s a seasonal thing, it’s not. In 2008, from January to February, there was a very slight increase in the number of companies shipping to the United States (from ~147K to ~148K).
At some point, the numbers have to start painting a rosier picture. However, for now, it seems clear that the global economy has not yet hit bottom.
- Watch List manufacturers are those that, during the most recent three month period, suffered a 50% or greater decline in volume shipped to their U.S. customers, versus the same period a year prior.
- Significant manufacturers are those that have sent 10 or more shipments to the U.S. by boat in the last 12 months, and at least one shipment by boat to the U.S. in the last three months. As of the end of February, there were ~93K significant manufacturers. (Note that this number is different from the number of companies that shipped to the U.S. during February. Not all significant manufacturers shipped in February, and not all companies that shipped in February are significant.)
- Significant U.S. buyers are those that have received 10 or more shipments by boat from overseas manufacturers in the last 12 months, and at least one shipment by boat from overseas manufacturers in the last three months. As of the end of February, there were ~78K significant buyers.
Questions? E-mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Thought I’d share some of the recent mentions of Panjiva across the web.
“One in four major Chinese manufacturers shipped less than half as much to U.S. customers in November through January than they did a year earlier, [Panjiva CEO Josh Green] said.”
“Panjiva data shows that 132 of the Big Three’s overseas suppliers wound up on Panjiva’s watch list at the end of January 2009″
“Yesterday, Panjiva came out with news that paints a dangerous and ugly picture when it comes to the financial viability of global suppliers.”
“What can you do about supplier disappearing acts? I’d recommend a heathy dose of supplier risk preventive medicine to start, using both internal performance and quality related information as well as proactive third-party content from providers like Panjiva and D&B.”
Supply & Demand Chain Executive
“Panjiva analysis shows nearly half of large U.S. buyers doing business with troubled global manufacturers; ‘they never even tell you they are in trouble…they just disappear’”