Ukraine Annual Review 2006: the year the cost base changed
A gas price shock that reset the economics of half of Ukrainian industry, a five-month political vacuum that barely touched commercial activity, and a credit expansion that nobody was supervising.
The year in one paragraph
Ukraine absorbed a near-doubling of its imported gas price, recovered industrially from a weak 2005, spent five months without a government without noticeable commercial effect, crossed into current account deficit, and built a credit structure whose vulnerabilities would be fully exposed within twenty-four months.
The four quarters
Q1 — gas interruption and price shock; the industrial cost base is reset.
Q2 — coalition deadlock alongside the strongest industrial recovery in two years.
Q3 — government formed with divided executive authority; foreign-currency household lending becomes mainstream.
Q4 — strong close; current account crosses into deficit; credit growth far outpacing output.
What drove the year
External steel demand recovering, which lifted the industrial base. Consumer demand expanding on rising wages and, increasingly, on credit. Construction accelerating into what would later be recognised as a bubble.
Against that, the gas price increase removed a structural cost advantage that Ukrainian industry had held since independence and had never been forced to operate without.
The structural change
2006 is the year Ukrainian industry stopped being cheap because of energy. Everything that followed — the chemical sector's decline, the metallurgical modernisation that did and did not happen, the energy efficiency investment of the following decade — traces to the arithmetic set in January.
The response was slower than it should have been because the shock was absorbed into margins rather than passed into prices, which made it invisible in the output data and postponed the adjustment.
What carried into 2007
An economy growing at a healthy rate on a deteriorating external position. A credit boom accelerating with no effective supervision. A property market disconnected from rental yields. A political system with divided executive authority and an early election already being discussed. And a gas price arrangement to be renegotiated annually, with no certainty about the next step.
The commercial reading
The most useful thing 2006 offers a company is the demonstration of how an input price shock selects between businesses.
The chemical producers were destroyed by it, the metallurgists were squeezed, and the food processors did not notice. None of that had anything to do with management quality; it was determined entirely by the share of gas in each cost structure, which was set decades earlier by Soviet plant design.
The transferable question is the one worth asking of any business anywhere: which single input price, if it doubled, would end the business case — and is anything being done about it while the price is still favourable?
Related in this archive
Share this analysis
Comments