Supermodeling allows a company to take an end-to-end view of its supply chain and make adjustments in production, distribution, and inventory practices to meet changing market demands.
The outlook for global supply and demand is constantly changing, particularly under the current economic circumstances. The situation is fluid: Fundamental market dynamics shift, the balances and trade-offs in cost equations change, and solutions such as outsourcing and localized production may lose their value. In response, global companies reassess and reshape their supply chain networks and operations, taking future developments into account. No one can accurately predict the future, of course, but companies can plan ahead by defining potential scenarios, risks, and options, and then assessing the likely outcomes of each.
Manufacturers and logistics service providers often struggle with this complex task. They typically apply ad-hoc spreadsheets and inconsistent data-collection methods rather than tailored analytical tools and standardized procedures for gathering relevant data. The tools most companies currently use to help them analyze changing situations in operations and supply chains are not perfectly suited for the job. Most are either very detailed, making this exercise cumbersome and time-consuming, or they are limited and unable to analyze mid- and long-term scenarios. Moreover, many existing statistical models are based on a regression of historical data. But historical models are inadequate when fundamental supply chain parameters such as demand, markets, products, and cost drivers are facing significant and unprecedented changes.
[Figure 2] Transitional planning of production and distribution alternativesEnlarge this image
Supermodeling offers a solution. This modeling method takes an integrated view of the end-to-end supply chain, from market-demand scenarios through order management and planning processes, and on to manufacturing and physical distribution (see Figure 1). It studies historic and "as is" market and order data as well as "to be" market scenarios and demand forecasts. Such scenario-based simulation leads to better strategic supply and demand balancing because new products, expected price changes, and options for physical network changes are dynamically incorporated into the model. Finally, supermodeling —conceptualized and tailored to companies' specific business conditions —provides a fact-based approach for making difficult but necessary decisions that may encounter political and emotional resistance within the company.
How is supermodeling different?
In general terms, supermodeling provides a computer replica of a real or planned supply chain system — what one might call a "model world." The scope and content of the model —entire value chain, highly detailed breakdown of data, full transparency of feedback loops, and high reliability of options —is more comprehensive yet no more complex than the typical supply chain optimization tools. Supermodeling's broader focus can address a wider range of questions and issues, such as volatile commodity pricing and availability, shifting perceptions of market players, and conflicting trading or purchasing activities, that are not covered by traditional supply chain models.
Other types of supply chain optimization tools improve physical networks by looking at transportation, distribution, and labor costs in isolation —an approach that may produce unexpectedly costly results. Supermodeling, on the other hand, not only examines physical production and distribution costs but also takes into account operations planning aspects such as supply management, manufacturing planning, and delivery management. In other words, it assesses the impact of various cost and value drivers, such as labor, transportation, technology, and productivity, on the entire network. Since supermodeling can alter those parameters to develop different scenarios, it can demonstrate how those changes might affect customer behavior or supply chain performance.
Supermodeling's output is more visual than that of traditional supply chain optimization tools. The level of detail it produces is based on a careful assessment of what is required to respond to both strategic and tactical questions. Outputs typically represent key measures in finance, performance of physical process flows and virtual information flows, capacity utilization, stock levels, and customer service, all in the context of various rules and constraints imposed over time.
Accordingly, the model is able to demonstrate the expected benefits of reducing lead times by streamlining business processes, managing or reducing variance, and improving responsiveness and flexibility. This allows users to compare end-to-end supply chain scenarios —from quote to delivery to cash — with each other and with the current, as-is situation. A "supermodeled" replica of a supply chain thus provides the scope needed to determine the appropriate course of action based on future demand scenarios and trends.
The objectivity of this approach makes it a helpful tool for achieving consensus among stakeholders. Ultimately, supermodeling enables "boardroom experimentation." It allows companies' top management to test hypotheses and see a visualization of the answer right away. They can use the simulations to identify how best to balance demand and supply, examining such options as whether —and when —to open or close factories, move production to a different location, or shift inventories between distribution centers.
For example, a global manufacturer of health care equipment used supermodeling to optimize its order-to-cash process, including the physical network, from sourcing through manufacturing to the customer, as well as the information flows. For this company, supermodeling was particularly powerful at speeding up and simplifying the decision-making process because multiple scenarios could be run with the participation of key stakeholders. They could instantaneously see the impact of proposed changes in the supply chain network and consequently make better, consensus-driven decisions, even when opinions regarding a particular situation had been divided prior to using the supermodel.
To obtain optimal results, a supermodeling exercise should follow a four-step process, as illustrated in Figure 2:
Establish a baseline, simulating the as-is scenario to validate and calibrate the model. Run a base-case simulation, applying projected demand over time by product and by region. Identify areas that will require new supply decisions.
Define and evaluate the major external trends that are likely to have a long-term impact on supply and demand.
Identify potential changes to investigate, with the aim of minimizing costs while maintaining the best balance between supply and demand. Set up scenarios that reflect those options in the model, and then simulate market and supply performance.
Evaluate results by comparing output in terms of key performance indicators. Continue iterations, with multiple runs and "what if" sensitivity testing, until the most effective solution becomes evident.
For a brief look at how one company applied this process in a distribution-network analysis, see the sidebar "Four steps to supermodeling success."
Future scenarios, year by year
Companies that have employed the supermodeling approach have been able to reduce costs and free up working capital. They also generally do a better job of matching supply to demand as it evolves from month to month and from year to year. This modeling approach allowed the health care equipment manufacturer mentioned above to avoid a costly physical supply chain setup in Asia and substitute a more costefficient solution based on insight provided by the supermodel. A change in sourcing and better timing of order fulfillment deadlines allowed it to adopt a leaner physical distribution network, cheaper transportation, and fewer stockholding locations. The model not only delivered tens of millions of euros in potential savings but also developed a solution that the whole business could support.
A more detailed example is the case of VELUX, a manufacturer based in Denmark. A major player in the global building materials sector, its products include roof windows and skylights, many types of decoration and sun screening, roller shutters, installation products, and remote controls and thermal solar panels for roof installation. VELUX has manufacturing suppliers in 11 countries and sales companies in nearly 40 countries.
In 2007 and 2008, a project team consisting of VELUX's supply chain and manufacturing strategy specialists and supply chain consultants (including the authors) developed a dynamic supply chain model to study alternative ways of managing information and physical material flow between production, stockholding points, and markets. The primary objective was to build a supply chain model for strategic planning and evaluation of options that would be specific to VELUX. Through evaluation of different scenarios, the model would support strategic manufacturing initiatives and ongoing sales and operations planning for the six-month to five-year time frame.
Today the VELUX Supply Chain Model (VSCM) is used in the company's windows and flashings group for long-term planning. The model is predicated on a baseline setup; its "basis year" employs actual production and sales data and incorporates future expectations for sales, productivity, and projected costs for raw materials, labor, and transportation. The model provides VELUX with the ability to evaluate different scenarios by showing year-by-year development in capacity utilization, product and/or component flows, and even investment costs.
VSCM has enabled the company to increase both the number of alternative scenarios to study and compare as well as the scope, relevance, and quality of the output. VELUX has used the model to examine several European manufacturing and supply chain scenarios. On the basis of that analysis, the company made important decisions that significantly impact manufacturing, logistics, and financial value drivers, such as optimizing production's environmental footprint and designing a longer-term sales and operations planning process, to name just two.
Capitalize on change
Many companies are content to establish supply chain processes and structures, and then allow them to continue as is until they become obsolete and problems arise. Or they may find that business is developing in such a way that their existing supply chain operations and processes are unfit to exploit market opportunities or meet market challenges. In today's competitive environment, that is no longer a viable way of conducting business.
If a supply chain modeling effort is to provide truly valuable decision support, then it must be based on a deep understanding of a company's specific situation, requirements, and key issues. For this reason, it's necessary to have a collaborative effort among model developers, analysts, the company's own business experts, and other stakeholders throughout the supply chain.
What makes supermodeling an appropriate tool for achieving that objective is that it gives companies that are looking to capitalize on change the ability to re-examine their production and delivery networks by taking into account cost and value drivers in the endto- end supply chain, all within the context of future growth. This approach can make visible to company management the potential payback for selecting a particular course of action.
Four steps to supermodeling success
A successful supermodeling implementation requires working through four basic steps. The following is a reallife example of how one company applied this modeling technique.
The company used to have a decentralized structure with stockholding delivery and service centers (DCs) in 16 European countries. Initial analysis indicated that a more centralized production and distribution process might significantly reduce costs without compromising service.
The primary challenge was to identify how many and which warehouses to close, and what level of service to offer from the remaining locations. That decision would have to be made in tandem with changes in order management processes and stockholding policies. To address those considerations, the project team developed a dynamic supply chain "supermodel" scoped to simulate and study alternative ways of managing information and physical material flow between production, stockholding points, and end customers. The project proceeded as follows:
1. Development of a baseline case. The model was calibrated to simulate one year as-is operation, and a baseline scenario was created. Confidence in the model was established because it could simulate and reproduce history with numbers for total annual l ogistics costs, inventory levels, and delivery performance that approximated what had actually been the case that year.
2. Development of future trend scenarios. By manipulating inputs to the model, several simulated scenarios were produced, along with the associated effects on costs and service. This allowed the team to understand the issues and draw up a short list of realistic potential solutions.
3. Evaluation of options. With 16 DCs in the "as is" situation, a simple optimization exercise was infeasible. Complicating matters was the fact that all of the country directors were against closing "their" warehouses. It was important, therefore, to help them objectively evaluate and compare alternatives.
The model run proposed closing down various groups of DCs and simulated the outcomes. The model was tested for all kinds of "what ifs"; it proved and visualized how stock and transportation costs could be balanced more effectively, without compromising service to local customers. The solution that proved best —cutting back from 16 DCs to three —would allow the company to cover all of its markets in Europe while enjoying a 20-percent saving in logistics costs.
4. Evaluation of results. The model scenarios and options were developed by the company's wider European logistics organization, and members of the group jointly selected the best solution. The modeling approach helped to establish consensus among the stakeholders, avoiding the dangerous route of making decisions based on political and emotional resistance to change.
If you feel like your supply chain has been continuously buffeted by external forces over the last few years and that you are constantly having to adjust your operations to tact through the winds of change, you are not alone.
The Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals’ (CSCMP’s) “35th Annual State of Logistics Report” and the subsequent follow-up presentation at the CSCMP EDGE Annual Conference depict a logistics industry facing intense external stresses, such as geopolitical conflict, severe weather events and climate change, labor action, and inflation. The past 18 months have seen all these factors have an impact on demand for transportation and logistics services as well as capacity, freight rates, and overall costs.
The “State of Logistics Report” is an annual study compiled and authored by a team of analysts from Kearney for CSCMP and supported and sponsored by logistics service provider Penske Logistics. The purpose of the report is to provide a snapshot of the logistics industry by assessing macroeconomic conditions and providing a detailed look at its major subsectors.
One of the key metrics the report has tracked every year since its inception in 1988 is U.S. business logistics costs (USBLC). This year’s report found that U.S. business logistics costs went down in 2023 for the first time since the start of the pandemic. As Figure 1 shows, U.S. business logistics costs for 2023 dropped 11.2% year-over-year to $2.4 trillion, or 8.7% of last year’s $27.4 trillion gross domestic product (GDP).
“This was not unexpected,” said Josh Brogan, Kearney partner and lead author of the report, during a press conference in June announcing the results. “After the initial impacts of COVID were felt in 2020, we saw a steady rise of logistics costs, even in terms of total GDP. What we are seeing now is a reversion more toward the mean.”
This breakdown of U.S. Business Logistics Costs for 2023 shows an across-the-board decline in all transportation costs.
CSCMP's 35th Annual "State of Logistics Report"
As a result, Figure 1 shows an across-the-board decline in transportation costs (except for some administrative costs) for the 2023 calendar year. “What such a chart cannot fully capture about this period is the intensification of certain external stressors on the global economy and its logistical networks,” says the report. “These include a growing geopolitical instability that further complicates investment and policy decisions for business leaders and government officials.”Both the report and the follow-up session at the CSCMP EDGE Conference in October provided a vivid picture of the global instability that logistics providers and shippers are facing. These conditions include (but are not limited to):
An intensification of military conflict, with the Red Sea Crisis being particularly top of mind for companies shipping from Asia to Europe or to the eastern part of North America;
Continued fragmentation of global trade, as evidenced by the deepening rift between China and the United States;
Climate change and severe weather events, such as the drought in Panama, which lowered water levels in the Panama Canal, and the two massive hurricanes that ripped through the Southeastern United States;
Labor disputes, such as the three-day port strike which stopped operations at ports along the East and Gulf Coasts of the United States in October; and
Persistent inflation (despite some recent improvement in the United States) and muted global economic growth.
At the same time that the logistics market was dealing with these external factors, it was also facing sluggish freight demand and an ongoing excess of capacity. These twin dynamics have contributed to continued low cargo rates through 2024.
“For 2024, I foresee a generally flat USBLC as a percentage of GDP,” says Brogan. “We did see increases in air and ocean costs in preparation for the East Coast port strike but overall, road freight is down. I think this will balance out with the relatively low level of inflation seen in the general economy.”
Breakdown by mode
The following is a quick review of how the forces outlined above are affecting the primary logistics sectors, as described by the “State of Logistics Report” and the updated presentation given at the CSCMP EDGE Conference in early October.
Trucking: A downturn in consumer demand plus a lingering surplus in capacity led to a plunge in rates in 2023 compared to 2022. Throughout 2024, however, rates have remained relatively stable. Speaking in October, report author Brogan said he expects that trend to continue for the near future. On the capacity side, despite thousands of companies having departed the market since 2022, the number of departures has not been as high as would normally be expected during a down market. Brogan accounts this to investors expecting to see some turbulence in the marketplace and being willing to stick around longer than has traditionally been the case.
Parcel and last mile: Parcel volumes in 2023 were down by 0.5% compared to 2022. Simultaneously, there has been a move away from UPS and FedEx, both of which saw their year-over-year parcel volumes decline in 2023. Nontraditional competitors have taken larger portions of the parcel volume, including Amazon, which passed UPS for the largest parcel carrier in the U.S. in 2023. Additionally, there has been an increasing use of regional providers, as large shippers continue to shift away from “single sourcing” their carrier base. Parcel volumes have increased in 2024, mostly driven by e-commerce. Brogan expects regional providers to claim “the lion’s share” of this volume.
Rail: In 2023, Class I railroads experienced a challenging financial environment, characterized by a 4% increase in operating ratios, a 2% decline in revenue, and an 11% decrease in operating income compared to 2022. These financial troubles were primarily driven by intermodal volume decreases, service challenges, inflationary pressures, escalated fuel and labor expenses, and a surge in employee headcount. The outlook for 2024 is slightly more promising, according to Kearney. Intermodal, often regarded a primary growth driver, has seen increased volumes and market share. Class I railroads are also seeing some positive operational developments with train speeds increasing by 2.3% and terminal dwell times decreasing by 1.8%. Finally, opportunities are opening up for an expansion in cross-border rail traffic within North America.
Air: The air freight market saw a steep decline in costs year over year from 2022 to 2023. Rates in 2024 began flat before starting to pick up in the summer, and report authors expect to see demand increase by 4.5%. Part of the demand pickup is due to disruptions in key sea lanes, such as the Suez Canal, causing shippers to convert from ocean to air. Meanwhile, the capacity picture has been mixed with some lanes having a lot of capacity while others have none. Much of this dynamic is due to Chinese e-commerce retailers Temu and Shein, which depend heavily on airfreight to execute their business models. In order to serve this booming business, some airfreight providers have pulled capacity out of more niche markets, such as flights into Latin America or Africa, and are now using those planes to serve the Asia-to-U.S. or Asia-to-Europe lanes.
Water/ports: The recent “State of Logistics Report” indicated that waterborne freight experienced a very steep decline of 64.2% in expenditures in 2023 relative to 2022. This was mostly due to muted demand, overcapacity, and a normalization from the inflated ocean rates seen during the pandemic years. After the trough of 2023, the market has been seeing significant “micro-spikes” in rates on some lanes due to constraints caused by geopolitical issues, such as the Red Sea conflict and the U.S. East and Gulf Coast ports strike. Kearney foresees a continuation of these rate hikes for the next few months. However, over the long term, the market will have to deal with the overcapacity that was built up during the height of the pandemic, which will cause rates to soften. Ultimately, however, Brogan said he did not expect to see a return to 2023 rate levels.
Third-party logistics (3PLs): The third-party logistics (3PL) sector is facing some significant challenges in 2024. Low freight rates and excess capacity could force some 3PLs to consolidate, especially if they are smaller players and rely on venture capital funding. Meanwhile, Kearney reports that there is some redefining of traditional roles going on within the 3PL-shipper ecosystem. For example, some historically asset-light 3PLs are expanding into asset-heavy services, and some shippers are trying to monetize their own logistics capabilities by marketing them externally.
Freight forwarding: Major forwarders had a shaky final quarter of 2023, seeing a decline in financial performance. To regain form, Kearney asserts that forwarders will need to increase their focus on technology, value-added services, and tiered servicing. Overall, the forwarding sector is expected to grow at slow rate in coming years, with a projected annual growth rate of 5.5% for the period of 2023–2032.
Warehousing: According to Brogan an interesting phenomenon is occurring in the warehousing market with the average asking rents continuing to rise even though vacancy rates have also increased. There are several reasons for this mixed message, according to the “State of Logistics” report, including: longer contract durations, enhanced facility features, and steady demand growth. A record-breaking level of new construction and new facilities, however, have helped to stabilize rent prices and increase vacancy rates, according to the report authors.
Path forward
What is the way forward given these uncertain times? For many shippers and carriers, a fresh look at their networks and overall supply chains may be in order. Many companies are currently reassessing their distribution networks and operations to make sure that they are optimized. In these cost-sensitive times, that may involve consolidating facilities, eliminating redundant capacity, or rebalancing inventory.
It’s important to realize, however, that network optimization should not just focus on eliminating unnecessary costs. It should also ensure that the network has the right amount of capacity to response with agility and flexibility to any future disruptions. Companies must look at their supply chain networks as a whole and think about how they can be utilized to unlock strategic advantage.
The notice of proposed rulemaking suggests a new standard that would require that:
certain pipeline, freight railroad, passenger railroad, and rail transit owner/operators with higher cybersecurity risk profiles establish and maintain a comprehensive cyber risk management program;
these owner/operators, and higher-risk bus-only public transportation and over-the-road bus owner/operators, currently required to report significant physical security concerns to TSA to also report cybersecurity incidents to CISA; and
higher-risk pipeline owner/operators adopt TSA's current requirements for rail and higher-risk bus operations to designate a physical security coordinator and report significant physical security concerns to TSA.
The publication of a “notice of proposed rulemaking” in the Federal Register typically begins a 60-day period for public comment from any interested party, and an additional 30 days for reply comments.
"TSA has collaborated closely with its industry partners to increase the cybersecurity resilience of the nation's critical transportation infrastructure," TSA Administrator David Pekoske said in a release. "The requirements in the proposed rule seek to build on this collaborative effort and further strengthen the cybersecurity posture of surface transportation stakeholders. We look forward to industry and public input on this proposed regulation."
The notice came a week after a White House representative warned the trucking freight industry that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has remained the most active and persistent cyber threat to the U.S. government, private sector, and critical infrastructure networks. The briefing came from a member of the administration’s Office of the National Cyber Director, in an address to attendees at the National Motor Freight Traffic Association (NMFTA)’s Cybersecurity Conference.
“In January, the National Cyber Director testified in front of Congress along with colleagues from CISA, NSA, and the FBI about this threat from the PRC, dubbed Volt Typhoon,” speaker Stephen Viña said in his remarks. “Volt Typhoon conducted cyber operations focused not on financial gain, espionage, or state secrets but on developing deep access to our critical infrastructure. This includes the energy sector transportation systems, among many others. A prolonged interruption to these critical services could disrupt our ability to mobilize in the event of a national emergency or conflict and can create panic among our citizens. Ultimately, if trucking stops, America stops.”
Online merchants should consider seven key factors about American consumers in order to optimize their sales and operations this holiday season, according to a report from DHL eCommerce.
First, many of the most powerful sales platforms are marketplaces. With nearly universal appeal, 99% of U.S. shoppers buy from marketplaces, ranked in popularity from Amazon (92%) to Walmart (68%), eBay (47%), Temu (32%), Etsy (28%), and Shein (21%).
Second, they use them often, with 61% of American shoppers buying online at least once a week. Among the most popular items are online clothing and footwear (63%), followed by consumer electronics (33%) and health supplements (30%).
Third, delivery is a crucial aspect of making the sale. Fully 94% of U.S. shoppers say delivery options influence where they shop online, and 45% of consumers abandon their baskets if their preferred delivery option is not offered.
That finding meshes with another report released this week, as a white paper from FedEx Corp. and Morning Consult said that 75% of consumers prioritize free shipping over fast shipping. Over half of those surveyed (57%) prioritize free shipping when making an online purchase, even more than finding the best prices (54%). In fact, 81% of shoppers are willing to increase their spending to meet a retailer’s free shipping threshold, FedEx said.
In additional findings from DHL, the Weston, Florida-based company found:
43% of Americans have an online shopping subscription, with pet food subscriptions being particularly popular (44% compared to 25% globally). Social Media Influence:
61% of shoppers use social media for shopping inspiration, and 26% have made a purchase directly on a social platform.
37% of Americans buy from online retailers in other countries, with 70% doing so at least once a month. Of the 49% of Americans who buy from abroad, most shop from China (64%), followed by the U.K. (29%), France (23%), Canada (15%), and Germany (13%).
While 58% of shoppers say sustainability is important, they are not necessarily willing to pay more for sustainable delivery options.
Gulf Coast businesses in Louisiana and Texas are keeping a watchful eye on the latest storm to emerge from the Gulf Of Mexico this week, as Hurricane Rafael nears Cuba.
The category 2 storm’s edges could also brush Florida as it heads northwest, causing tropical storm force winds in the lower and middle Florida keys. However, the weather agency said it is too soon to forecast Rafael’s impact on the U.S. western Gulf Coast.
In the face of campaign pledges by Donald Trump to boost tariffs on imports, many U.S. business interests are pushing back on that policy plan following Trump’s election yesterday as president-elect.
U.S. firms are already rushing to import goods before the promised tariff increases take effect, to avoid potential cost increases. That’s because tariffs are paid by the domestic companies that order the goods, not by the foreign nation that makes them.
That dynamic would likely increase prices for U.S. consumers as importers pass along the extra cost in the form of price hikes, according to an analysis by the National Retail Federation (NRF). Specifically, Trump’s tariff plan would boost prices in six consumer product categories: apparel, toys, furniture, household appliances, footwear, and travel goods. “Retailers rely heavily on imported products and manufacturing components so that they can offer their customers a variety of products at affordable prices,” NRF Vice President of Supply Chain and Customs Policy Jonathan Gold said in a release. “A tariff is a tax paid by the U.S. importer, not a foreign country or the exporter. This tax ultimately comes out of consumers’ pockets through higher prices.”
The rush to avoid those swollen costs can already be measured in the form of rising rates for transporting ocean freight, as companies start buffering their inventories before the new administration officially announces tariff hikes. Transpacific rates are still $1,000/FEU or more above their April lows, showing increased ocean volumes and climbing rates generated by shippers’ concerns about supply chain disruptions including port strikes and the Trump tariff increases, supply chain visibility provider Freightos said in an analysis. "The Trump win may start shaking up supply chains even before he takes office. Just the anticipation of higher tariffs may lead importers to pull forward shipments, creating a preemptive freight frenzy," Judah Levine, Head of Research at Freightos, said in a release. “Frontloading will cause freight rates to feel the heat as importers race to dodge the extra costs, similar to what took place with Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods in 2018 and 2019."
Another group sounding a note of caution about international trade developments was the Global Cold Chain Alliance (GCCA), a trade group which represents some 1,500 member companies in more than 90 countries that provide temperature-controlled warehousing, logistics, and transportation. “We congratulate President Trump on his election. We also congratulate all those who have been elected to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives,” GCCA President and CEO Sara Stickler said in a statement. “We are also committed to promoting the growth of exports from U.S.-based food production and broader manufacturing sectors. We will engage constructively in the policy discussion about future trade policy and continue to make the case for the importance of maintaining balanced and resilient trade routes for food and other temperature-controlled products across the world.”
Businesses in the European Union (EU) were likewise wary of tariff plans, judging by a statement from the VDMA, a trade group representing 3,600 German and European machinery and equipment manufacturing companies. "Donald Trump's second term will be a greater challenge for German and European industry than his first presidency. We must take his tariff announcements seriously, in particular. This will once again put a noticeable strain on transatlantic trade and investment relations," VDMA Executive Director Thilo Brodtmann said in a statement. “The USA is and will remain the most important export market outside the EU for mechanical and plant engineering from Germany. Our companies offer the products required to implement the re-industrialization of the USA that Donald Trump is striving for. The VDMA's overall outlook for the American market therefore remains positive."