|
Documento senza titolo
|
|
GENERAL OVERVIEW
 |
2008 was a very difficult year; a very difficult one to sum up in just a few words or with a brief judgement.
It is certainly a year that we will remember for many years to come though, due both to the financial
and economic events and the changes that they brought about, triggering off processes involving
national economies and the international order of important powers that are still not over. It is widely
believed that the world will be a different place at the end of this recession.
The recession began at the end of 2007 and turned into a full-blown phenomenon with the bankruptcy
of the Lehmans Brothers Bank on 15 September 2008. On that same day the Dow Jones Index was
down 500 points that was the most significant fall since after 11 September 2001. In the ensuing days
and months the situation worsened and the initial financial crisis, with its origins closely tied to the
subprime mortgage crisis already felt in 2007, then became an economic one. Now, near to the closing
of the first six months of 2009 there is some talk of light at the end of the tunnel with some economic
indicators showing slight improvements, or rather they are no longer getting worse or falling so fast.
Yet there is still much fear about what still looks risky and unclear. Toxic assets in bank balance sheets,
unemployment that continues to grow (thereby eroding the spending capacity of the population in many
countries), reduction in the value of wealth and uncertainty in the future for consumers are all factors
that make the horizon of the crisis uncertain and cloudy. Right now there is discussion as to the state of
important production groups in key industries such as the automobile industry and the forecasts for the
US economy, even if there is a recovery at the end of 2009, are only just starting to pick up on improvements
in some indicators. The banks are still under heavy stress and consequently access to the service
is difficult and credit cards are still a cause for apprehension for the possible negative developments in
the event of widespread insolvency on behalf of credit card holders.
Of course there are geographic and economic areas that have felt the crisis to a lesser extent or at least
have been more able to react and count on internal resources and their own incentive to development
than others. China in particular has shown all its strength as a growing economy due not only to its
size but also to its centralised management and planning capacity that have enabled it to be active
and reactive in adapting to change. In actual fact, all the governments of the leading countries and the
national and international monetary authorities have imposed policies and actions in response to the
crisis (unprecedented in recent economic history), obviously proportionate to their involvement but in
general coordinated and standardised. There is still much tension and most of all the significant dif-
ficulties facing the banking system create instability that it is feared may hide more surprises and lead
to further moments of tension for the international economies. All eyes and expectations are on the US
where a recently appointed President with wide national and international consensus is continuing to
support the capitalization of credit institutions so that they may respond to a further deterioration in the
macroeconomic picture. The US administration is also looking for solutions to aid families in difficulty
with the reimbursement of mortgages so as to prevent distraint and stabilise the housing market.
Hopefully, however, there should be an improvement in the international situation already at the end
of 2009. At least we hope this will happen and despite some important figures that are still down compared
to 2008: industrial production, employment, spending incentive, investments and above all the
GNP, many people are already talking of improvements and a possible recovery. The BCE is talking of
a slowdown in the negative trend while the FMI, more cautious, is talking of a gradual recovery possible
as from 2010, and still sees unresolved matters in Euroland countries preventing a quick, decisive
recovery. In the meantime, raw material prices seem to have stabilised, starting from energy prices
which do in fact show some sign of increase, while gold and copper prices are still falling. Copper in
particular has a strategic role for important countries such as China and so the fact that prices are still
falling calls for caution and a re-evaluation of the expectations of a quick exit from the negative cycle
investing the major economies.
|
THE INTERNATIONAL STONE SECTOR
 |
The building industry is traditionally the major market for stone materials throughout the world, yet it
is not the only one and others such as furnishings, funeral art, monuments and artwork are not only economically
important but also and above all strategic and very prestigious. Consequently, any phenomenon
with a significant effect on the building industry has an effect on the stone industry too even though
this may not be to the same extent. The stone industry is part of the building world yet it is only present
in certain phases of the entire process and can therefore feasibly follow its own course within this process.
What is vital, however, is that it cannot be estranged from it (even though it may not undergo the
same size variations as the entire industry) since it is the building industry that keeps it afloat.
Over the last two years now the building industry has behaved differently in different geographical areas.
In some important markets for the industry the downward trend began already in 2007. The United
States first and foremost but also Germany and other countries in the European Union as well as the Far
East have shown signs of difficulty and negative trends as from the second half of 2007, despite the fact
that the stone industry recorded an increase in 2007 on 2006 (another year of overall expansion). The
attention of the building industry observatories has been mainly directed towards the US, heightened by
the fear of the general situation which has proven to be more and more unstable and dangerous by the
day. In 2008 the bubble burst, yet for the building industry (especially the new building segment) and
in terms of building yards and licenses issued, the crisis was already evident and “simply” got worse,
especially in certain consumption brackets. The stone “system” felt the blow to a lesser extent than
others since it is generally positioned in the upper brackets or rather more stable ones affected less by
the overall turmoil.
However it was not able to come out unscathed by the general fluctuations. The overall housing market
in North America suffered a downward trend throughout 2008 as is shown for example by the price
indexes. The monthly statistics given by the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index1 show a national
average drop over the year of over 18% and in some segments this reached almost 38% (single family
residential buildings). The sales of existing houses suffered an 11% price reduction overall whereas
new single family houses underwent a reduction of over 30% and this was accompanied by an equally
sudden reduction in consumer trust. Faced with this situation, US imports of finished natural stone
products fell by 16% over the year for marble and travertine and 27% for granite, in terms of volume.
This is a significantly higher reduction compared to other leading countries for the stone industry. The
figures in terms of value did not fare any better either.


Bearing in mind the fact that houses are only one part of the market for stone materials, looking at the
S&P/Case-Schiller indexes, the stone industry fared fairly well. This confirms the fact that it is positioned
on the market in consumer brackets that are generally more stable than the average of the building
industry, as is shown by the value tables too. In terms of volume, marble fared better than granite
whereas in terms of value, granite fared better than marble. Comparing the countries shown in the tables
above (the major importers of finished stone products), it is clear that the situation had already begun to
decline in 2007 while things were different for the other two countries. There are in fact three different
scenarios for the three different countries: In China, only now is there a crisis, in Germany there has
been a crisis since 2008 and in the USA there has been one since 2007, and in all three cases there are
variations in terms of materials and both average and absolute values.
Yet what are the details concerning the crisis in the stone market in the United States? Table 3 clearly
shows that granite suppliers suffered a little less than marble and travertine suppliers in terms of prices,
above all average prices, and a little more in terms of overall volume, and this was anticipated already
in the previous year and strongly accentuated in 2008. The decline in overall volume of finished stone
products imported, which exceeded 23% over the year with peaks of -27% for granite, is a signifi-
cant decline that cannot be reabsorbed easily or without grief and without the consequences being felt
throughout the entire industry, and well beyond the country itself. Moreover, granite was also involved
in a strong defamatory campaign in 2008 that claimed the material was dangerous even though this had
been refuted a long time before and brought back to its real, minimum significance. In short, there were
various difficulties both inside and outside the stone industry that strongly affected its performance on
one of its best markets.
Did the major stone suppliers to the USA play an active or passive role in 2008?
On which partner countries did the crisis have the worst impact and on which did it remain sustainable
or even light? Given that the highest decrease was in the volume of finished granite products, the supplier
countries all felt the pinch to some extent, but especially Italy, followed by Brazil and India. Again
as regards granite, blocks or unpolished slabs, the scenario is somewhat different. US imports of these
products rose quite significantly in terms of volume, especially from India and China, even though the
figures are much more limited compared to those for finished products. As regards marble and travertine,
on the other hand, US imports were not so badly hit but the variations were more concentrated on
Turkey (leading supplier) and then Italy, although Mexico and China were also strongly penalised (yet
the figures are much lower).
To conclude this part of analysis, after the United States we should take a look at Germany and China,
this time as consumers of stone materials and not only as stone producers for the USA. Germany has
been experiencing a fairly serious crisis in the building industry for some time now and this has gradually
worsened thereby leading to an overall reduction in annual consumption. This has occurred alongside
another issue which will probably have consequences over the next few years too even when the
current crisis has toned down and a new positive cycle has begun. Some experts have already clearly
reported on this phenomenon which concerns the funeral market that is particularly prosperous in certain
countries including Germany. There is a cultural change underway favoured by the general lack
of resources to be placed in gravestones and monuments that leads to more cremations than burials.
This in turn leads to a gradually increasing reduction in funeral monuments, headstones and chapels
(permanent structures) and an increase in small urns that better suit the surviving relations who can
thus keep a more private and closer memory of their loved ones. It is difficult to say when cremation
will take on strongly but it is certainly a respectable procedure both as regards the environment and the
deceased and generally much easier to deal with. Hence the situation is unlikely to be totally reversed
again. What’s more, this preference is very likely to spread to other countries too, especially where the
difficulty in managing the areas used for burials will push the local institutions themselves to prefer
cremation. However, apart from these variations in certain uses, German imports of finished marble and
granite products fell significantly in 2008, particularly those from Italy that corresponded to only almost
a quarter of the finished granite products that came from China. In two years Italy lost an overall 33.5%
in value as regards finished granite products imported by Germany while China gained 17% in the same
period. This shift in market share which began a few years ago has become a generalised phenomenon
and above all has involved the average values even more than the quantities: Italy’s have dropped a few
percentage points while China’s have risen slightly.
What has been said up to now anticipates to a fair extent what happened to a third of the countries taken
into consideration, whereas China as every year requires separate consideration. It should be said immediately
that Chinese imports, even before exports, rose in 2008 and this was above all in terms of raw
material, especially marble. Egypt was China’s second supplier, exporting over 1 million 200 thousand
tons in 2008, even if the advance of Egypt on the Chinese market is a process that began at least three
years ago. This occurred to the detriment of Spain, Iran and Italy that have lost their positions which
up to just a very few years ago were far superior to Egypt’s. Yet in addition to marble imports granite
imports increased too, thereby integrating the domestic products. Granite was imported above all from
India (the volume imported exceeded even the marble from Egypt) and Brazil which however saw its
share of the market and volumes drop. A comparison of the two types of material in imports and exports
of blocks and finished products (although the imports of finished products are really slight) makes one
thing clear: the imports of marble and travertine, being much higher than exports in blocks, are clearly
widely destined for consumption on the home market, while the flow and placing of granite materials is
statistically more “mixed”. In view of the high consumption figures on the home market, although domestic
production of granite is high it is integrated with imports yet imports are also partially destined
for exports as finished products. In this respect India benefits more than all the other markets since it
has gained an important role equal to Egypt when it comes to marble. Reading between the lines, however,
the important fact is something else: the overall result of imports-exports indicates that despite its
slowness compared to the size of the country and the industry, the market is still opening up a little and
is developing a greater division of products on the domestic market too. In other words the country’s
consumption is moving towards a gradual integration and extension of its range of products, both in
terms of materials and types of products and this can only be welcomed as a very positive note for the
industry on a global scale.
What remains to be analysed is what has happened to the other large Asian producer, India itself, which
has become an important supplier of its major competitor China.
As everyone knows the country is reluctant to integrate its own production with products from other
countries. There are openings even in this troubled 2008 but they are very limited and are growing cautiously
with an accent on quality. In 2008 India imported modest quantities of marble blocks from Italy
and to a much lesser extent from Turkey and a meagre group of other countries, including Iran. Yet the
best performance was seen in exports of raw materials, that is raw materials and semi-raw materials,
above all granite, which recorded an overall +17.3% over the year. Of particular significance were exports
to the US and China that alone grew by 31.6%, again in volume, and confirmed its position as the
leading destination country for Indian materials.
The annual result for Brazil, the other leading world granite producer, was on the other hand negative,
recording a steep 24.7% drop in the volume of raw and semi-raw materials exported (back to just above
the tons exported in 2004), and a 19.4% drop in finished products. Exports to Italy, China and Spain fell
as did finished products to the US, the major importer. These are difficulties related to the international
role of the country that operates first and foremost with North America thanks to its closeness and tradition
and hence was inevitably significantly hit by the fall in uses on the US market.
Yet another different trend was seen in Turkey which exports mainly marble. Turkey’s exports of marble
blocks and slabs increased by 20.3%, especially to China and Syria, while exports of finished products
remained stable overall, resulting from a fall in exports to the USA and an increase in transactions
in free zones which are therefore difficult to trace officially. In Turkey too imports of finished granite
products rose, albeit in a limited way.
A final note on the Eastern European countries. Despite the array of different situations, these markets
remained stable although there was a gradual slowdown underway. It was the Russian market above all
that held its own, together with the Polish market, even if prospects for 2009 do not seem to be all that
encouraging at the moment.
|
MACHINERY
 |
After 2005, 2008 was the first year when figures for Italian exports of machinery and technology for
the stone industry began to fall against the previous year. Before that, in fact, the annual figures to all
the countries that import Italian products increased every year, at least for the machinery items that can
certainly be related to the specific work of processing, cutting and polishing and finishing of marble and
similar natural stones. Even though the absolute figures for 2008 remained decidedly higher than 2004
(since they were affected by what happened in the following years that increased the quantities and values
of the items in question), the percentage comparison in terms of value was negative. This proves the
overall difficulties facing the entire international stone industry, in addition to the growing competition
facing the national machinery industry on foreign markets from areas with lower production costs that
are consequently particularly menacing at times of weak economies.

The quantities, for what they are worth, remained very positive yet the values that count more as an indicator
of trends and activities at times like this, recorded a -1.53% decrease on 2007. This was despite
the almost 457 million Euros of total exports (considering only exports that can be identified without
interference from other industries). It is however a very respectable turnover, especially at a time when
traditional buyers of Italian machinery are having to deal with the crisis and in some cases are starting
to become independent for a significant part of their own markets.
It is appropriate at this point to look at trade with the most important countries for Italian technology,
firstly in general and secondly by individual categories of machinery, bearing in mind that in the first of
the tables that follow the data is general for all three categories of machinery taken into consideration.
First we shall examine the countries dividing them into three large categories: those for which the value
and quantity data recorded decreases, those for which the value and quantity data recorded increases
and those for which the value and quantity data recorded both decreases and increases, choosing based
on quality and specific types.

In Table 11 we first selected the important countries that reduced their imports from Italy, then those
with a difference of just one percentage point between volume and value and then those that actually
increased their imports from Italy. First let’s look at the second category of countries where it is evident
that the details of the different types of machines alone can give an interpretation to the trends. We shall
limit our reading to two countries, with opposite trends that are also particularly important for the size
of their domestic markets as well as the stone market in general: Germany and China.


The two countries have obviously followed different needs and strategies, despite some common choices.
The first preferred to continue to import cutting machinery, albeit at a lower value, with a fairly even
reduction in the other items. The second decided to work in the opposite way, opting for basic processing
machinery, and in very limited quantities, despite the striking annual percentage variations. In fact,
the overall values of the two countries are very similar yet the production structure is very different as
too are the individual figures that emphasise the different relationship that Italy and its stone technology
has with the two nations. It is difficult to speak about prospects but obviously, aware of the speed
at which the domestic production of machinery is developing in China (benefitting from the discoveries
and developments of Italian and other producers) each and every change and development in the
local picture should be closely followed since exports of Chinese technology have already increased
in the Far Eastern area and other areas too and have become a common choice for certain categories
of products. There is a very different scenario in Germany where there is simply a lower growth in the
industry in general that is anyway a market used to the high quality of Italian products and the precision
of the results that they can offer. Looking at the items more closely we shall see how this overall result
came about.
It is more interesting, however, to read the data for the countries that recorded decreases in both values
and volumes, showing a decisive reduction, sometimes even too sudden, on 2007. The prime example
is the United States that is an important partner in the main secondary industry to the stone industry
too. US imports fell for all types of Italian machinery, including the lightweight but sophisticated tools
machinery that in the last few years had sustained and characterised Italian export trends to the country
and are still today the major item in the table.

The annual decrease is high and reflects the trends of the stone industry on the home market. It is likely
to grow even more since the second country on the table in 2008, in terms of size, is Spain. Spain’s
stone industry is also experiencing difficulties in exports and domestic consumption as too is Turkey,
even though the latter’s exports of natural stone, including finished products, were hit a lot less than
Italy’s or Spain’s

The machinery data for the processing, polishing and finishing of natural stone remained positive, at
least in terms of value, but the other items were severely down on 2007, with a percentage reduction
of almost 50%. Iran too significantly reduced its purchases from Italy as did many other countries as
shown in Table 11.
Table 11, however, also shows positive situations where countries recorded growth both in terms of
volume and value that mirror the national stone industries that are still growing or at least are actively
trying to grow. Finding the North African countries on the list together with Egypt, that is really making
great progress fast on the international stone markets, merely confirms what has been discussed above
yet Canada is a newer entry and a positive one too. Together with Russia, the Arab countries and Angola,
Canada obviously wants not only to expand in the industry but to expand on an appropriate level,
suited to the quality of its materials that are well-known and appreciated on the markets.
A more in-depth reading of the data involves looking at where the cutting machinery and tool machinery
were actually sold, that is which countries recorded increases or decreases in the major items of
Italian technology exports. Here below are two tables showing the countries that imported machinery to
the value of over two million euro and recorded either increases or decreases on 2007. Of note is the fact
that in the first table for cutting machinery, the countries where there was coherence between volumes
and values are not listed. In the first part of the table there is the USA, followed again by Spain and then
Greece and Iran, ahead of Turkey.

And it comes as no surprise that in the second part of the table, showing the countries that are growing,
India leads, followed again by Egypt and then by the other producers seen in the general table.
Again in the case of tools machinery, the United States leads the table for percentage decreases, yet
here there is a surprise, India, that comes a close second rather than appearing as a growing country in
the third part of the table. One country that remains important however is Egypt where quantities rose
although values remained more or less stable.

One country that is growing fast, on the other hand, is Russia. Russia recorded positive figures in all
the specific imports items and almost doubled its technology acquisitions compared to 2007. The same
applies to the North African countries and for many Middle and Far Eastern countries too.
All in all, 2008 was a difficult year that took the brunt of the investment difficulties of some important
national stone industries yet in general was able to profit from the growth opportunities of other producers
with whom relations were lively and above all which show prospects for the future. Inevitably,
every year it becomes more difficult for countries to maintain their hard-earned positions, yet the desire
of many countries to promote their own resources as best as they can still offers good room for growth.
This is helped by the skill and desire to move forward and renew that have always characterised this
specific branch of Italian industry.
|
CONCLUSIONS
 |
Given the complex overall scenario, it is inevitable that we look at the stone industry in relation to the
international crisis to try to interpret what has happened over the past few months in terms of future
prospects and possible strategies for improvement.
We have seen that the major markets for the stone industry have been inevitably and seriously affected
by the crisis (be it from North America or elsewhere) and its subsequent developments when it moved
from the financial world to the real economy and the people. There had already been significant signs
of the US real estate crisis in 2007 and this was discussed in last year’s report since it had already affected
the stone industry too. In 2008, as we have seen, the crisis exploded and spread worldwide. It
even damaged some of the fundamentals of trade and industrial production in the stone industry and
other much larger and crowded industries and gradually burst a series of other bubbles too. In the stone
industry a negative trend concerning some markets that did however remain important, strong markets
(still a limited number) then affected other markets. Consequently, the latter, although experiencing
another year of expansion compared to the previous year, recorded negative figures in 2008 and even
in the beginning of 2009.
We have seen that some areas recorded positive final figures for the use of materials which is positive
for the international trade of both raw materials and finished products. But in 2009 the trend slowed
down, in some cases suddenly, giving rise to the same uncertainties in the stone industry that the building
industry, and others deriving from it, have experienced and are still experiencing. Nevertheless there
are obviously and fortunately still very active markets that keep prospects as well as profits and daily
industrial activity positive. What has changed, however, is the geography of demand and consequently
supply flows and the division of production tasks as well and we have already seen how the process is
advancing. In some fundamental markets for the stone industry the gap is widening between the high
profile, personalised demand and the usual more standardised, serialised demand that is increasingly
in the hands of low-cost producers with large production volume capacity. Moreover, even the latter
demand segment is often decreasing even though exports from countries like China still do not really
seem to feel the effects. Important countries are experiencing a very delicate and uncertain period, not
only as regards imports but also on their home markets and this may well turn into a destabilising trend
for other producers too. In such a difficult, uncertain phase, triggering off an even fiercer price war
would not be of benefit to anyone yet it is very likely. Moreover, relations between the various markets
are so close now and the “osmosis” between differing situations so frequent that what happens to one is
unlikely not to have repercussions on the partners and markets of the suppliers and consumers.
After so much discussion and analysis, what can be said about the prospects for the near and medium
future? And to what extent do they involve such a tangible industry as the stone industry? Obviously
this question does not apply only to the stone industry but to a fair extent to all manufacturing industries.
Many emphasise in fact how the actual origins of this crisis and its developments are objectively
re-evaluating the role of the material production of goods, significantly reducing the strength and
weight of the intangible economy, in its financial and above all speculative aspects. The role of services
and research is obviously not questioned, it is the prevalence and excessive dimension of speculative
mediation in relation to the real production of goods and material wealth at the base of every company
that is. Without going into discussions that do not directly concern the stone industry and this report it is
worth noting that an industry like the stone industry whose raw material is one of the oldest in the world
and is turned into sophisticated products for a wide number of uses thanks to physical and technical
processes with a high degree of creativity obviously fits well into the panorama of reappraised industries.
Even more so because of its area of uses: building, living in the town and at home, decorating our
environment with beautiful objects and works or art that may be lasting or ephemeral, honouring the
memory of those passed away, and so on. It is an industry that can be found in all countries and all national
and local histories in the world. Its consolidated international dimension increases every year and
even in 2008 it was at a level that is difficult to find in other industries, despite the sufferance of some
countries seen in the analysis above. One new feature we think should be remembered is the role of
Egypt as a marble supplier to China even though it is not yet the leading supplier as it comes second to
Turkey that has been China’s partner for much longer and has a much more consolidated and structured
industry. This is in our opinion the newest feature and potentially the most significant in the international
scenario for 2008, showing prospects that are a little different from the more traditional ones of
the other suppliers. It will be interesting to see the future developments, also in the light of the wider
relations that the two countries maintain, both between themselves and with other leading countries in
the industry and even more so in the light of the next developments in the general crisis, remembering
that in 2008 it may be said that China remained the only large consumer and producer of stone to have
recorded a relatively positive year, together with India.
What is the risk that the industry remains trapped in a much more significant general crisis than previous
ones over the next few years? It is very likely that 2009, all in all considering the countries with
a significant international dimension, will conclude with a negative balance on 2008 both for total
uses and imports-exports. As regards the general crisis, it is difficult to foresee what is about to happen
although many believe that “the worst is over”. There are not yet enough objective signs though to
breathe a sigh of relief and hence this sounds more like a phrase to ward off bad luck than the result of
a cold rational assessment of real data. As Bill Emmott states with his British understatement, “at the
moment the good news is that things are going badly more slowly”. The real question mark, however,
actually concerns the post-crisis scenario, what the role and reference markets will be once it is all over,
and the “lessons on the future” as a well-known Italian financial newspaper wrote, are open to different
opinions and lively and interesting debate. In the meantime the real tangible risk for the companies that
are currently facing difficulties on a daily basis is that their efforts will be in vain and their prospects
nullified after the crisis when they could be so precious to the recovery and development of countries
and industries, ours included. The risk is the objective individual waste of large quantities of resources
and skills required today and even more so tomorrow. First and foremost human resources that could be
distanced from the industry to swarm to other industries as well as economic, material and intellectual
resources, capital, research, creativity and innovation capacity that it will be difficult for the industry
to gain back with the level of experience previously acquired when the recovery kicks in. How many
companies will resist the reduction in trade revealed in the statistics? And how many will resist the
changes in the material and product flows and skills required? In other words will these changes lead to
the impoverishment or recovery of the stone industry and other industries important for the growth and
development of many countries?
Another potential risk for the future of our industry is the renewal of asymmetric competition (that
suffers from commercial distortions too) that is possible in the stone industry as in other industries.
We have already seen the revival of nominal attacks on some natural stone materials accused of being
dangerous for the environment and people. It will be up to the experts to decide to what extent, if any,
this is true. We do not think these attacks will lead anywhere. It is however a symptom of unscrupulous
and unfair competition that will have to be dealt with realistically and consistently, with an awareness
of the consequences and possible duplications as globalisation is changing in the stone industry too,
adopting new orders in some cases or even old systems in others.
And in these potential changes in the scenario that are inside and outside the stone industry, what will
happen to demand? Will the fundamental markets in the industry hold their ground? We have seen again
that the main international consumers remain essentially faithful to natural stone materials and products
despite the difficulties or maybe this is due to some market pressures. The products do feel the affects
of reduced spending power, the external situations that influence the availability of wealth and demand
in general, but they are ready to start afresh as soon as there is a sign of recovery. Hence at the moment
they are taking refuge in privileged niches of use that recognise natural stone’s intrinsic worth yet there
remains the possibility of their use being extended to other brackets too. Who though will be more
ready to start afresh and ride the recovery from the first signs?
Many experts maintain that who is able to deal with the crisis in the right way, rather than being trapped
by it, will come out on top. Those who have investment capacity for research and innovation, those who
have a sound financial situation and pool of clients, payers first and foremost, those who are not dependent
on the banks for their running credit but have their own cash reserves and better comply to certain
criteria of company solidity can come out of the recession stronger and ahead of the others, ready to
take up the opportunities that the recovery will surely offer, in the end. This criteria is valid not only on
an international level but also in production districts, countries, areas that are less ephemeral and more
deeply involved with the basic necessities of people and the community. Once again in this case the
natural stone industry may be in the front line, ready to renew its leadership, its figures and production
rates as well as the creation of wealth.
|
| Tav. A - International raw material production |
 |
All data in italics are estimates
*: India: data referred only to marble and granite
|
| Tav. C1 TOTAL MARBLE - IMPORT |
 |
Tav. C1 TOTAL MARBLE -EXPORT

|
| Tav. C2 - TOTAL GRANITE - IMPORT |

Tav. C2 TOTAL GRANITE - EXPORT

|
|
| Tav. C3 - TOTAL RAW MATERIALS - IMPORT |

Tav. C3 - TOTAL RAW MATERIALS - EXPORT

|
|
| Tav. C4 - TOTAL PROCESSED MATERIALS, BLOCKS EQUIVALENT - IMPORT |

Tav. C4 - TOTAL PROCESSED MATERIALS, BLOCKS EQUIVALENT - EXPORT

|
|
|
General Overwiev  |
2006 followed on with the positive trend recorded in 2005 in terms of global economic growth. Not only was the upward trend confirmed but it was also further consolidated with figures exceeding expectations. A solid improvement even in the face of potential weaknesses to the overall picture and future concerns such as the negative signs from the US real estate market and fluctuations on the Shanghai stock market at the beginning of 2007.
New countries contributed significantly to international trade figures and the increase in overall consumption and production which also benefited from the favourable trend in oil prices in the second half of the year. Hence 2007 began in a general climate of optimism on the international markets, especially in certain Asian and European countries whose partner remains North American market. The Beige Book estimates are still showing an upward trend although this is expected to wane in the second three-month period of 2007. Overall though there are some interesting general points, especially in terms of their repercussions on the stone industry. 2006 was again dominated by the two major Asian countries, China and India, with a gradual recovery in the European economy reflected in the all-time highs of the Euro against the yen and the US dollar. Consequently, Europeans enjoyed an advantage in terms of the purchase of raw materials although they also suffered from competition with American exports. However, it is the US real estate market which is likely to have more negative effects than the above, although it was only towards the last three-month period at the end of 2006 when this became an important issue. Experts believe the risk is still “normal” and inflation is under control in the major production areas. Yet there are potential weaknesses in terms of the US’s foreign debts, possible tension as regards the price of energy and the trends on some real estate markets which have perhaps grown too much over recent years.
According to official data already distributed on the first three-month period developing countries are expected to continue to grow in 2007, although at a slightly slower pace, with the Chinese GNP continuing to rise in two-figure numbers. The European Union seems to follow the same trend, consolidating the 2006 results starting from a reduction in the overall public debt. This trend is led by Germany which has made a full comeback as the driving force of the economy of the continent. Italy has recorded results higher than expectations, especially in terms of exports, although company expectations and consumer trust were slightly lower in the first three-month period in 2007. Hence there are still some questions open as regards the national situation where companies’ reactions to the challenges have improved. Italy’s productive system is obviously in the process of repositioning itself in relation to the market and although this is not so obvious from a general overview of the situation it does come through in the final data.
Certainly, some hotbeds of international tension remain very much at the fore. These provide the setting for the overall picture and are the reason for certain investments of resources which could be otherwise employed and above all are potential destabilising agents. Yet a significant number of countries drive the growth of the international economy and trade are developing independently and, as far as it seems, away from the tension, managing their own internal issues and avoiding dangerous breakdowns or the involvement of third parties which may be just as risky.
|
Marble Machinery  |
It is always difficult to interpret national and international events in the technology sector. Attempts to classify and analyse statistics are hindered because machinery products move from one country to another as goods produced in one area and then sold, placed and used in another. Moreover, they are often shipped in different lots and are therefore confused with other mechanical and automatic parts destined for other uses and industries. This is because basic engineering technology is the same for various uses and industries and often innovation comes from other production and research circuits which is then adapted to the industry. Much technology, often sophisticated, is actually conceived in the stone industry and then mixed with other parallel industries. Yet there is also technology from other industries which is imported and adjusted to meet the industry requirements. Hence, it is hard to separate what is specifically imported and exported for the stone industry from the rest and this difficulty remains even though ceramics have now managed to achieve a separate classification for their uses. Furthermore, as recalled in previous years, it is not possible to monitor the engineering for quarrying or quarry handling machinery which account for interesting figures in terms of both value and volume. Only a few industry associations in Italy and abroad collect this specific information and distribute their direct findings.
The official data for the Italian industry for cutting and processing technology (first and second level) for natural stone point to a generally positive year in 2006, although not evenly distributed amongst the various trade partnership areas. Our data, as can be seen from our tables, only takes into account items which can be attributed exclusively and definitely to stone industry technology and excludes anything which may have more varied uses or customs classification items which mix them with other industries. Hence the turnover figures are lower than the total that they really represent but they are “sure”, especially when it comes to the fluctuations and variations which emerge from the comparisons with other years for the various geographical areas.
So the year 2006 was all in all a positive one, recording a small percentage rise on the previous year. This is not a superb result but it is solid and is concentrated on the more sophisticated machinery for second level processing and machine tools for which the Italian industry is particularly qualified. The latter two categories also recorded increases in the average values which confirm that the Italian industry has maintained its position of supplier of highly advanced quality technology in the world. Close proximity with the national processing industry has obviously enhanced the possibility to experiment and develop production for its leading customers, i.e. those in the Italian stone industry who are well known for their high quality standard requirements. The fast growth, however, concerning the stone industry throughout the world over the last decade has brought about certain changes. For example, the time for innovation to be transferred to foreign competitors has shortened (which also applies to distant competitors) as too has the actual lead time in the production of technology. What we are now seeing is the sale of new technology not only and sometimes not first to Italian users but rather to foreign processors and users with all the consequences in the industry over time. In addition to the shorter innovation transfer times, there is a growing tendency for other countries to produce their own machinery and subsidiary products. Moreover, even in the machinery sector there are new competitors who are acting totally independently on the international markets with no inferiority complexes. National industries such as those in China and India are now competing against the Italian industry and their close working ties with the local stone industries will help them to build trade circuits which in time will allow them to carry out their own experimentation. At present these are consumers who use non-automated technology too but they stand alongside those who use more advanced technology for whom the Italian mechanical and subsidiary industry is no longer the leading supplier. The Italian share of the market has consequently suffered and only the overall growth of the stone industry makes it possible to see the figures for national machinery exports to the rest of the world in a positive light.
Now let’s look more in depth at the figures showing the trends for Italian exports of primary and secondary cutting and finishing machinery and tool machines. Let’s take the value data in euros since they are the most significant.

So slight growth again can be seen on an international level which proves the presence of the Italian machinery industry everywhere where there is a national processing stone industry. There are some points to be made however, Firstly, tool machines account for by far the largest share of exports and are increasing in all the important geographical areas. Exports are also increasing in the Far East. Here they serve to integrate the local production of technology which is less advanced, thereby confirming what is said above as regards the gradual shortening of the time for the circulation of advanced technology. India is the major buyer overall for this technology, followed at a distance by China and Indonesia and all three are growing significantly. The Middle East, on the other hand, seems saturated at the moment and is experiencing a slowdown and consequently recorded limited figures. The major market for Italian tool machinery remains the European Union. This too recorded an increase on last year even though it was not able to match the 2004 figures. Spain was the most important customer, followed by the UK, then Portugal, France and Belgium. North America was also important, as it has been for some time, while in Europe the major markets outside the EU were Russia and Turkey, yet both fell against 2005 figures.
As always, the relationships between the various items on the previous table provide the key to understanding how the various countries shift their focus in the various cycles and what the local intentions are depending on whether the cycles need strengthening or are sufficiently equipped. Cutting machinery, especially for primary cuts, represents the first phase of the cycle and industrialisation, and is the first to start growing again when the stone industry and consumption are in a phase of expansion. The 2006 figures practically record an annual increase compared to 2005 only in Europe, inside and outside the EU, which altogether accounts for almost half the markets. Spain again was the major market, followed by France, Greece and a new, up-and-coming Poland, and Turkey which was still expanding and only the US exceeded. On the other hand, Brazil and Iran declined while India equalled Turkey.
As regards finishing machinery, the picture is a little more complicated. In the European Union which is the major market, Germany set itself alongside Spain yet its positive role was somewhat inferior. The major buyer was the United States which is still growing and regaining its 2005 position while this is practically the only item where North Africa showed signs of growth on the previous year. Within North Africa, and in terms of the other items, the figures differ according to the individual countries and only Tunisia recorded increases for practically all items compared to 2005, yet only in a limited way.
Hence, the overall picture is fairly simple, generally positive and quite clear. Tool machinery technology held the highest market shares and the most important areas were the closest areas and those more traditionally served by Italian producers, with a few particularly trusting markets and some shy newcomers.
At present, there do not seem to be any new particularly “revolutionary” products in terms of production or management. Research is certainly active though and new ideas are welcomed by machinery production companies which have to deal with new markets and new producers. For the time being the most interesting innovation concerns monitoring the safety of quarry fronts. This is more the domain of institutions rather than private enterprises even though the latter support such initiatives and are highly concerned by the matter. The use of certain forms of electronic and computer automation is already normal procedure in the stone industry and innovation is more to do with improvement and optimisation rather than radical changes. In other words, for the time being there do not seem to be the premises for innovation comparable to what has already been introduced such as the use of automatic controls for the mixing and dosage of the cutting mixture in granite sawing or the diamond in the cutting of limestones which was introduced some decades ago now. Of course this does not mean that the industry is at a standstill and that there are no developments, even very effective ones, in the field of technology. It merely indicates that development is fairly linear and continuous without any sudden leaps in quality. |
|
Marble Machinery  |
It is always difficult to interpret national and international events in the technology sector. Attempts to classify and analyse statistics are hindered because machinery products move from one country to another as goods produced in one area and then sold, placed and used in another. Moreover, they are often shipped in different lots and are therefore confused with other mechanical and automatic parts destined for other uses and industries. This is because basic engineering technology is the same for various uses and industries and often innovation comes from other production and research circuits which is then adapted to the industry. Much technology, often sophisticated, is actually conceived in the stone industry and then mixed with other parallel industries. Yet there is also technology from other industries which is imported and adjusted to meet the industry requirements. Hence, it is hard to separate what is specifically imported and exported for the stone industry from the rest and this difficulty remains even though ceramics have now managed to achieve a separate classification for their uses. Furthermore, as recalled in previous years, it is not possible to monitor the engineering for quarrying or quarry handling machinery which account for interesting figures in terms of both value and volume. Only a few industry associations in Italy and abroad collect this specific information and distribute their direct findings.
The official data for the Italian industry for cutting and processing technology (first and second level) for natural stone point to a generally positive year in 2006, although not evenly distributed amongst the various trade partnership areas. Our data, as can be seen from our tables, only takes into account items which can be attributed exclusively and definitely to stone industry technology and excludes anything which may have more varied uses or customs classification items which mix them with other industries. Hence the turnover figures are lower than the total that they really represent but they are “sure”, especially when it comes to the fluctuations and variations which emerge from the comparisons with other years for the various geographical areas.
So the year 2006 was all in all a positive one, recording a small percentage rise on the previous year. This is not a superb result but it is solid and is concentrated on the more sophisticated machinery for second level processing and machine tools for which the Italian industry is particularly qualified. The latter two categories also recorded increases in the average values which confirm that the Italian industry has maintained its position of supplier of highly advanced quality technology in the world. Close proximity with the national processing industry has obviously enhanced the possibility to experiment and develop production for its leading customers, i.e. those in the Italian stone industry who are well known for their high quality standard requirements. The fast growth, however, concerning the stone industry throughout the world over the last decade has brought about certain changes. For example, the time for innovation to be transferred to foreign competitors has shortened (which also applies to distant competitors) as too has the actual lead time in the production of technology. What we are now seeing is the sale of new technology not only and sometimes not first to Italian users but rather to foreign processors and users with all the consequences in the industry over time. In addition to the shorter innovation transfer times, there is a growing tendency for other countries to produce their own machinery and subsidiary products. Moreover, even in the machinery sector there are new competitors who are acting totally independently on the international markets with no inferiority complexes. National industries such as those in China and India are now competing against the Italian industry and their close working ties with the local stone industries will help them to build trade circuits which in time will allow them to carry out their own experimentation. At present these are consumers who use non-automated technology too but they stand alongside those who use more advanced technology for whom the Italian mechanical and subsidiary industry is no longer the leading supplier. The Italian share of the market has consequently suffered and only the overall growth of the stone industry makes it possible to see the figures for national machinery exports to the rest of the world in a positive light.
Now let’s look more in depth at the figures showing the trends for Italian exports of primary and secondary cutting and finishing machinery and tool machines. Let’s take the value data in euros since they are the most significant.

So slight growth again can be seen on an international level which proves the presence of the Italian machinery industry everywhere where there is a national processing stone industry. There are some points to be made however, Firstly, tool machines account for by far the largest share of exports and are increasing in all the important geographical areas. Exports are also increasing in the Far East. Here they serve to integrate the local production of technology which is less advanced, thereby confirming what is said above as regards the gradual shortening of the time for the circulation of advanced technology. India is the major buyer overall for this technology, followed at a distance by China and Indonesia and all three are growing significantly. The Middle East, on the other hand, seems saturated at the moment and is experiencing a slowdown and consequently recorded limited figures. The major market for Italian tool machinery remains the European Union. This too recorded an increase on last year even though it was not able to match the 2004 figures. Spain was the most important customer, followed by the UK, then Portugal, France and Belgium. North America was also important, as it has been for some time, while in Europe the major markets outside the EU were Russia and Turkey, yet both fell against 2005 figures.
As always, the relationships between the various items on the previous table provide the key to understanding how the various countries shift their focus in the various cycles and what the local intentions are depending on whether the cycles need strengthening or are sufficiently equipped. Cutting machinery, especially for primary cuts, represents the first phase of the cycle and industrialisation, and is the first to start growing again when the stone industry and consumption are in a phase of expansion. The 2006 figures practically record an annual increase compared to 2005 only in Europe, inside and outside the EU, which altogether accounts for almost half the markets. Spain again was the major market, followed by France, Greece and a new, up-and-coming Poland, and Turkey which was still expanding and only the US exceeded. On the other hand, Brazil and Iran declined while India equalled Turkey.
As regards finishing machinery, the picture is a little more complicated. In the European Union which is the major market, Germany set itself alongside Spain yet its positive role was somewhat inferior. The major buyer was the United States which is still growing and regaining its 2005 position while this is practically the only item where North Africa showed signs of growth on the previous year. Within North Africa, and in terms of the other items, the figures differ according to the individual countries and only Tunisia recorded increases for practically all items compared to 2005, yet only in a limited way.
Hence, the overall picture is fairly simple, generally positive and quite clear. Tool machinery technology held the highest market shares and the most important areas were the closest areas and those more traditionally served by Italian producers, with a few particularly trusting markets and some shy newcomers.
At present, there do not seem to be any new particularly “revolutionary” products in terms of production or management. Research is certainly active though and new ideas are welcomed by machinery production companies which have to deal with new markets and new producers. For the time being the most interesting innovation concerns monitoring the safety of quarry fronts. This is more the domain of institutions rather than private enterprises even though the latter support such initiatives and are highly concerned by the matter. The use of certain forms of electronic and computer automation is already normal procedure in the stone industry and innovation is more to do with improvement and optimisation rather than radical changes. In other words, for the time being there do not seem to be the premises for innovation comparable to what has already been introduced such as the use of automatic controls for the mixing and dosage of the cutting mixture in granite sawing or the diamond in the cutting of limestones which was introduced some decades ago now. Of course this does not mean that the industry is at a standstill and that there are no developments, even very effective ones, in the field of technology. It merely indicates that development is fairly linear and continuous without any sudden leaps in quality. |
|
Conclusions  |
What were the changes in 2006 in the stone industry? There is always some change or innovation even in an industry like ours which is not strategic on an international level yet is strategic for the economic development of some countries and anyway moves goods, money and work almost everywhere in the world.
- We have seen that global production continued to rise in 2006, albeit more slowly and here we witness the first new trends compared to those we had been used to over recent years. The large Asian producer, China, that is responsible for the major changes in the industry on an international scale, actually slowed down its own quarry production, preferring to integrate this with raw materials purchased in other countries where it continues its “buying campaign”. Its leading supplier of raw marble and slabs was Turkey, followed by Egypt, while its major granite supplier was India, followed far behind by Brazil. The figures are large and are due to the fast development of the domestic building industry. This has been so fast that it has even generated reasonable apprehension among international investors. The economic development of the country is obviously creating a series of mechanisms which are involving the stone industry too. The first consequence for the industry is that foreign supplies have become even more important on a local level since they represent a substantial additional supply of quality materials which is also necessary for development of the domestic industry. The second is that India that has continued to develop and grow in the industry has become the leading overall producer of natural stone, with its production of marble, sandstone and other stones as well as granite. Table A in the Statistics Appendix features marble and granite only since the figures available for sandstone and other local stones are too chaotic in too many countries to be compared coherently in terms of international production (which we always try to keep as clear as possible despite the numerous difficulties). If we consider these items too there is no doubt that India is the new leader in the industry both in terms of raw material production for foreign markets and in terms of production in general. This is also because the country is experiencing a period of great economic expansion in general and consequently so too is the stone industry. It should also be remembered that India is also very much at the fore of the technology sector too, as is shown by the data concerning trade amongst areas for primary and secondary processing machinery. Italian exports to the area did not actually feel the competition from India very much as far as certain types of products important to Italy are concerned but there is definitely a bracket of local buyers who are well covered by Indian products and are therefore outside the circuit of Italian products, on the second level too.
- Investments abroad aimed at decentralising production, according to a development model which copies the growth in other countries like Italy, increased in 2006 and are bringing the stone industry nearer to other industries which are in lighter production categories. This is the answer to external challenges, mostly in terms of costs, which our industry is experimenting too by making its product mix and strategies more complex, more international and, at least for now, more efficient. We have already seen the risks which are anyway embedded in the process of company internationalisation that is the further shortening of innovation transfer times from national to foreign industries. It is of course an inevitable risk for all producers at the fore of processes and a consequence of the speed of information, experience and technology. Other production industries are experiencing radical reorganisation in terms of the international division of jobs, skills and roles on the international markets. We are living in a time of great changes triggered off by political and technological developments. All we can do is to deal with the changes step by step, trying to understand and learn as much as possible from others and to absorb and manage everything that is new and useful and to invent. The fusion of global and local environments does cause problems but also creates cues and solutions which may become very stimulating and positive. This can be seen in the statistics of an “old” country like Italy: its skills and ability to maintain a solid position in the high end products segment have worked well with the new inputs and production models generated by globalisation. Moreover, the possibility of internationalising at least a small share of its product mix has enabled the country to stand firm as the leader in terms of quality in consumer markets like Germany and the United States which are not only prestigious but also very profitable. We have seen the average unit price of exports from various suppliers. The process requires very high production efficiency standards which do not always bring sufficient profit margins. Further, even without excluding new, less sophisticated products (more “common” products but quality products in certain aspects) this is increasingly becoming the role and the position of our country and other similar ones on the international markets.
- Hence an increasing number of countries have positioned themselves in a fairly complex and creative way thanks to experiences which are new to the stone industry in market segments which are increasingly less price-sensitive. Price is in fact very clearly a factor that does not create comparison or competition among many international producers. In the more traditional countries such as Italy and Spain, innovation in the stone industry has developed in an alternative and complementary way, not just purely in the managerial and technological sense of cost reduction, production optimisation etc., even though these issues obviously get much attention. It should be emphasised that there is an explicit ambivalence in terms of managerial optimisation: it is well known that this is not a competitive strength for many classes of producers, yet apart from being a useful aim it is also a necessary one to be achieved and constantly updated. Hence companies are aware that general optimisation including cost reduction and production innovation is a value in itself as it brings product innovation and is a way of improving a company’s and an industry’s positioning and overall efficiency. However, this does not provide a competitive advantage for countries whose basic cost levels are those of European countries. The latter and others in the same position will have to combine their presence capacity with other less material factors which are less immediate and probably more risky yet hopefully efficient to maintain their advantage on the international markets. The risk is still high because the vertical differentiation of market segments is increasingly quicker as seen in the technology data: the fast, overall growth of India in all areas of the stone industry and subsidiary sectors clearly indicates that India will soon be the main competitor even for China in the fundamental finished products segment.
- The best markets and the upper market segments in general, need special attention to be suitably defended from competitors outside the stone industry too. Careful planning in this sense will lead to stabilisation of demand over time and in terms of quality which in turn leads to a better, more organised supply as it allows companies to achieve better planning of production and, ultimately, higher profitability. The whole industry benefits and in particular the districts where the companies able to move in this direction operate (since the effects do not remain within the confines of the individual companies or even the local area but even other districts). This is the role of the big players mentioned above who drive the geographical area and industry sector in which they operate. In general, this role is attributed because of technological or managerial innovation but it actually applies to marketing and the general enhancement of products or materials too. In our industry particularly clever companies or areas specialised in a unique product have been successful in this way. We might recall for example the market for skyscraper cladding in granite which was a market opened up by the Italians, or rather a handful of Italian companies and subsequently followed by others. In 2006 too, although they may not have achieved the same level of innovation as mentioned, certain companies did successfully focus on consolidating and stabilising trade relations and supply segments with a view to making demand less fluctuating. They achieved success on different routes but their common strong point was undoubtedly their reliance on their distinguishing features so as not to be lost in the sea of producers.
- But how did they manage to distinguish themselves and maintain an advantageous and recognisable unique profile on such a varied, crowded market of producers and consumers? One of the possible answers is concentration on the distinctive features of a place for example, i.e. reliance on some element which cannot easily be reproduced or taken away by competitors. In a world where acquiring innovation is increasingly faster thanks to more and more efficient and faster and faster communication networks, there is also the other side of the coin which involves turning everything outside globalisation to one’s own advantage as a unique competitive element. The inability to copy goods has become a distinctive competitive element which may also be a decisive winning element. Let’s think about a name which has the power to evoke a wealth of values, memories and other elements from which there emerges a positive connotation which is immediately recognisable: the Roman travertine of the Colosseum, Assuan Red, Carrara white, the Taj Mahal white, Black Africa and so on. These names alone are a guarantee and attraction for upper market consumers and draw other materials and products which are not as attractive but maybe technically more suitable for more difficult or special uses. Concentration on distinctive features is a possible solution, for example, to face competitors from outside the world of natural stone. Such competitors are very strong and contribute to the complex situation facing the industry as they often take the names of stones to exploit their image. Even within the industry itself, a unique product can be exploited to distinguish a district, area, company in order to inspire its use through clever management, while taking care not to harm the symbolic heritage behind it. The tools to carry out careful marketing of such a precious product are available and in many cases experience is even consolidated. The important thing is to be aware that dealing with a product of shared value means that it has to be managed accordingly in order to protect it for present and future generations.
|
|
|
|
| Tav. A - International raw material production |
 |
| Tab. B - Italian raw material production |
 |
Sources: fonti locali ufficiali (Uff. regionali, Associazioni di categoria, ecc..)
Notes on Table B:
All data in italics are estimates
Many Regional Governments are late in data collecting, and use data collecting and classifying
criteria which vary from one year to the other
For the region of Lazio we have included the tuff productions, relating to years 2003, 2004 and 2005 |
| TAV. C1 TOTAL MARBLE - IMPORT |
 |
|
| TAV. C1 TOTAL MARBLE - EXPORT |
 |
Notes on tables C
- Austria: trade flows of exported/imported blocks to/from Germany for 2004 have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- China: trade flows of exported blocks of granite to Hong Kong have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- Germany: imported granite blocks from Norway 2002, 2003, 2004 have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- Iran: 2003: 2002-2003; 2004: 2003-2004; 2005: 2004-2005; 2006: 2005-2006;
- Netherlands: import of blocks of granite from Belgium has been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- United Kingdom: trade flows of granite blocks to/from France and Norway have been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- Singapore: imported granite blocks from Malaysia have been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- United States of America: imported granite blocks from Italy 2003-2004 has been modified, removing an as assumed unreliable item.
|
TAV. C2 IMPORT EXPORT INTERNAZIONALI: GRANITO
Grezzo + lavorati |
 |
|
TAV. C2 IMPORT EXPORT INTERNAZIONALI: GRANITO
Grezzo + lavorati |
 |
Note relative alle tavole C
- Austria: l’interscambio con la Germania nell’export blocchi e nell’import blocchi graniti per l’anno 2004 è stato modificato, escludendo una voce non ritenuta affidabile;
- Cina: l’interscambio con Hong Kong nell’export blocchi graniti è stato modificato, escludendo una voce non ritenuta affidabile;
- Germania: l’import di granito in blocchi 2002-2003-2004 dalla Norvegia è stato modificato, escludendo una voce non ritenuta affidabile;
- Iran: 2003: 2002-2003; 2004: 2003-2004; 2005: 2004-2005; 2006: 2005-2006;
- Paesi B assi: l’import di blocchi di granito dal Belgio è stato escluso, perché ritenuto non affidabile;
- Regno Unito: l’interscambio di granito in blocchi con la Francia e la Norvegia è stato escluso, perché ritenuto non affidabile;
- Singapore: l’import di granito blocchi dalla Malesia è stato escluso, perché ritenuto non affidabile;
- Stati Uniti d’America: l’import blocchi di granito dall’Italia 2003-2004 è stato modificato, escludendo una voce non ritenuta affidabile.
|
| TAV. C3 TOTAL RAW - IMPORT |
|
 |
|
| TAV. C3 TOTAL RAW - EXPORT |
 |
Notes on tables C
- Austria: trade flows of exported/imported blocks to/from Germany for 2004 have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- China: trade flows of exported blocks of granite to Hong Kong have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- Germany: imported granite blocks from Norway 2002, 2003, 2004 have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- Iran: 2003: 2002-2003; 2004: 2003-2004; 2005: 2004-2005; 2006: 2005-2006;
- Netherlands: import of blocks of granite from Belgium has been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- United Kingdom: trade flows of granite blocks to/from France and Norway have been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- Singapore: imported granite blocks from Malaysia have been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- United States of America: imported granite blocks from Italy 2003-2004 has been modified, removing an as assumed unreliable item.
|
| TAV. C4 TOTAL PROCESSED - IMPORT |
|
 |
|
| TAV. C4 TOTAL PROCESSED - EXPORT |
 |
Notes on tables C
- Austria: trade flows of exported/imported blocks to/from Germany for 2004 have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- China: trade flows of exported blocks of granite to Hong Kong have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- Germany: imported granite blocks from Norway 2002, 2003, 2004 have been changed by removing an assumedly unreliable item;
- Iran: 2003: 2002-2003; 2004: 2003-2004; 2005: 2004-2005; 2006: 2005-2006;
- Netherlands: import of blocks of granite from Belgium has been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- United Kingdom: trade flows of granite blocks to/from France and Norway have been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- Singapore: imported granite blocks from Malaysia have been removed as assumedly unreliable;
- United States of America: imported granite blocks from Italy 2003-2004 has been modified, removing an as assumed unreliable item.
|
|
|
|