European Wind Services Study
Find out which way the wind blows
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 01
Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 02
Market Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 03
Part I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .04
European wind services – market size, market growth and competItive structure
Part II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
European wind services – opportunities, threats and challenges
Part III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Investment in wind services
Research Design and Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
Introduction
Wind energy is certainly one of the most fascinating
types of power generation among alternative
energies: zero costs and emissions as far as its
origination is concerned, high power generation in
steady wind regions, and cost competiveness with
traditional energy sources in an increasing number
of regions. No surprise: the wind energy sector has
been one of the fastest-growing and most dynamic
industries in Germany and Europe over the past
decade. So far, key stakeholders such as wind
turbine manufacturers (OEMs), project financiers,
investors, wind park developers and operators have
focused on the development and installation of
on- and increasingly off-shore wind parks – size
and volume matters. The long term, stable cash
flows of wind parks are proving attractive in volatile
markets with low government bond returns.
With installed capacities steadily increasing,
the demand for service and maintenance has also
constantly risen. The European wind services
market is expected to reach €4.5 billion in 2020
from €2.3 billion in 2011. This solid development
potential, a fragmented field of service providers,
and international growth prospects should present
interesting buy-and-build strategies for financial
investors. It is anticipated that by 2020, turnovers
and margins in the maintenance business will be
more attractive than the construction of onshore
and offshore wind farms.
With increasing numbers of wind turbines coming
out of their warranty periods over the next few
years the market will open up to a large number of
new participants. Shifts in value chains and market
models are likely to contribute to significant new
market opportunities also in new geographies.
Taylor Wessing together with Deloitte undertook
an expert survey of European wind services market
participants in the spring/summer of 2012 as well
as commissioning primary market research.
The key market trends and outlook are summarised
in our study. This should be an interesting read
for anyone concerned with wind energy – especially
investors and funders.
David Krüger, Deloitte
Carsten Bartholl, Taylor Wessing
Hamburg / Munich, August 2012
1
Executive Summary
ISPs and OEMs
in the European wind services market
Market Characteristics Onshore /Offshore
Onshore
The European wind services market has historically
been dominated by OEMs with a market share of
63% in 2011. Major regional OEMs include Enercon,
Gamesa, Nordex, Repower, GE Energy and
Siemens.
As an increasing number of wind turbines come
out of their initial OEM warranty maintenance contracts, increasing opportunities are being presented
for ISPs to gain market share. This increasing
number of post-warranty maintenance contracts in
the market and possible advantages of ISPs in
respect of cost efficiency, local market knowledge
and accessibility are likely to drive an increase in
their European market share from the 25%
experienced in 2011.
Historically, OEMs have typically signed O&M
contracts covering two to five years. To help retain
market share, OEMs are increasingly seeking to
sign long-term warranty contracts /full service
agreements (including performance guarantees for
the WTG) of – in some cases – up to twenty years
for existing and new customers. The trend to
longer terms contracts is also supported by project
financiers who are increasingly demanding longterm service contracts to lower cash flow volatility
and wind farm owners seeking performance
guarantees and predictable maintenance costs.
OEMs see the wind services market as an
opportunity to diversify their business and secure
an additional source of revenues in an increasingly
competitive WTG market.
Our study included an assessment of leading
European ISPs and OEMs from the perspective
of their business coverage (onshore /offshore),
functional/service scope, competitive outlook and
industry challenges. The following eleven key
findings summarise the outcomes of our study:
2
1. The €2.3 billion European wind services market
has strong growth prospects driven by ageing
wind parks and an increasing installed base
(including repowering).
2. While Germany, Spain and the UK are the
largest wind services markets, geographic shifts
will require new service delivery footprints.
3. The current market is largely onshore and OEM
dominated, but significant changes are expected by 2020. The ongoing dominance of OEMs
in the offshore segment would not preclude
new entrants engaging as subcontractors.
4. Offshore has the highest profitability
expectations and the greatest scope for
efficiency improvements.
5. O&M cost reductions are likely be realised
through technological improvements and
reductions in offshore transport and logistics.
6. The most important requirements for
successful services companies are price,
quality and responsiveness.
7. European firms are expected to be well
positioned to counter international market
entrants.
8. The largest industry challenges will be
the availability of infrastructure and qualified
personnel.
9. Wind services are viewed favourably compared
to other renewable sectors. Growth prospects
and international expansion are particularly
attractive.
10.Wind service - Central Europe the place to
invest (now) on a mid term basis.
11. Midsize and full service maintenance –
the perfect target company.
Offshore
Investment cost
rather low
high, in particular for planning, construction,
infrastructure, and grid connection
Power generation
structures
decentralized
centralized
Power yield
lower as compared to offshore,
due to stronger fluctuation
constantly high, owing to more favourable
wind conditions (approx. double the amount of
full-load hours as compared to onshore)
Technology
mature technology
higher technological requirements due to
heavier stress; considerable saving potential in the
cost of energy is to be expected only in the years
to come
Infrastructure
more than 20 years lead in experience
high demands on maritime logistics etc. and
substructure/foundations as water levels rise
Risks
calculable and insurable
high, both under the technological and financial
aspect, currently hard to insure
Feed-in compensation
lower after Renewable Energy Sources Act
higher after Renewable Energy Sources Act
Public perception
basically positive, civic participation possible,
but increasing protests against new wind energy
plant projects
positive, but sluggish development
Development
potential
low, as good locations have already been occupied and technological effects largely exploited
high, since development has only just started and
offers huge potential
Funding requirement
relatively low
very high, bank loans problematic due to
financial crisis
Grid extension
less relevant, since grid connection usually exists
prerequisite, grid connection yet to be realized
at enormous cost
Market and players
many investors, rather diversified
highly-capitalized international investors,
major utility companies
Service requirements
lower, since easy to reach
complex, due to distance and weather
conditions, high downtime costs
3
Part I
European wind services –
market size, market growth and competitive structure
I.1: Finding 1 //
The €2.3 billion European wind services market has strong growth
prospects driven by ageing wind parks and an increasing installed base
(including repowering)
The global wind services market is expected to grow
from € 4.6 billion to reach € 10.8 billion in 2020
with a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of
10 % (s. figure 1). This compares with a historical
CAGR of 18 % from 2005-2011. The European
market comprised 51 % of the global market in 2011
and, while the most significant region, its CAGR
of 11 % over 2005 to 2011 lagged the global rate.
Similarly, the European CAGR to 2020 of 7 %,
reaching 4.5 billion in 2020, is somewhat less than
the 10 % projected globally.
The slower growth in Europe (s. figure 2) largely
reflects the relative maturity of the European wind
market. It is the oldest and largest operations and
maintenance (O&M) market.
Historically, European wind services were most
strongly driven by:
> the strong increase in overall installed capacity
driven by well established feed-in tariffs
and other forms of government incentives or
tax rebates;
> the ageing of wind turbines and higher levels
of associated maintenance; and
> wind turbine component failure, which is in large
part also age related.
These drivers are anticipated to persist to 2020
and new growth is in particular expected from the
offshore segment. The age of the installed wind
capacity is a critical revenue driver as O&M costs
for newer turbines are estimated at only 10% of the
annual cost of power generation rising to as high
as 35% by the end of a turbine’s life. As figure 1
illustrates, the global offshore wind services market
was historically a European one, and reached
ca. € 210 million in 2011. Europe will continue
to dominate offshore in terms of size and growth,
with a CAGR of 19 % from 2012 to 2020.
This sharply contrasts with the more mature
European onshore market. The European market
share in the global onshore O&M market is
expected to reduce from 49% in 2011 to 34% in
2020 reflecting stronger growth rates in installed
capacity outside of Europe in particular in the Asian
and North American markets.
Fig. 1 – Global and European wind services market revenues
Fig. 1 – Global and European wind services market revenues
€m
€m
10,000
10,000
8,000
8,000
6,000
6,000
4,000
4,000
2,000
2,000
0
0
2005
2005
2006
2006
2007
2007
2008
2008
2009
2009
Market size global – Onshore
Market size global – Onshore
Market size Europe – Onshore
Market size Europe – Onshore
2010
2010
2011
2011
2012
2012
2013
2013
2014
2014
2015
2015
2016
2016
2017
2017
2018
2018
2019
2019
2020
2020
Market size global – Offshore
Market size global – Offshore
Market size Europe – Offshore
Market size Europe – Offshore
Source: GBI Research
Source: GBI Research
Fig. 2 – European wind services market size and wind power capacity
€m
3,500
GW
200
3,000
150
2,500
2,000
100
1,500
1,000
50
500
0
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Market size Europe – Onshore (€m)
Market size Europe – Offshore (€m)
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Cumulative wind capacity Europe – Onshore (GW)
Cumulative wind capacity Europe – Offshore (GW)
Source: EWEA/GBI Research
4
5
I.2: Finding 2 //
While Germany, Spain and the UK are the largest wind services
markets, geographic shifts will require new service delivery footprints
The European wind power industry has benefited
historically from well established government
financial support and incentives reflecting, inter
alia, the European Union’s “20-20-20” plans to
reduce CO2 emissions by 20 % and include 20 %
renewable energy based generation in its total
energy mix by 2020. As illustrated in figure 3, the
European wind services market is dominated by the
well developed and mature German, Spanish and
UK markets which have both significant installed
capacity and a larger proportion of older turbines
requiring regular maintenance. In 2011, Germany
accounted for the greatest share of wind services
revenues with €1.0 billion (44%), followed by Spain
(28 %) and the UK (13%).
It is worth noting that Spain, in contrast to other
European markets, is expected to see its annual
O&M revenues decrease over the years to come
(s. figure 3). This reflects a decrease in serviceable
wind capacity additions as a result of cuts in
feed-in tariffs motivated by the government’s
desire to rein power sector costs. This is in contrast
to increasing annual additions for other major
European wind services markets (s. figure 4).
Fig. 4 – Serviable wind capacity additions in Europe – trend over 2012–2020
(on year-on-year basis starting 2011)
1.500
1.000
500
0
-500
-1.000
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Linear (Delta Turbine Capacity in Service (MW) – UK)
Linear (Delta Turbine Capacity in Service (MW) – Germany)
Linear (Delta Turbine Capacity in Service (MW) – Spain)
Linear (Delta Turbine Capacity in Service (MW) – Other)
Source: GBI Research/Deloitte Analysis
Fig. 3 – European wind services revenues by country
Fig. 3 – European wind services revenues by country
€m
€m
5,000
5,000
It is expected that the European growth until 2020
will be driven by the offshore markets in the UK
and Germany as well as by Italy, France and Turkey
with forecast CAGRs of 6 %, 12 % and 21%,
respectively. New markets in Eastern Europe, in
particular Poland, will also increase in significance.
Wind service providers will need to expand their
delivery footprints into these newer, higher growth
markets. This is likely to provide new opportunities
for both existing service providers and investors.
4,000
4,000
3,000
3,000
2,000
2,000
1,000
1,000
0
0
2005
2005
2006
2006
Spain
Spain
2007
2007
Germany
Germany
2008
2008
UK
UK
2009
2009
2010
2010
2011
2011
2012
2012
2013
2013
2014
2014
2015
2015
2016
2016
2017
2017
2018
2018
2019
2019
2020
2020
Other
Other
Source: GBI Research
Source: GBI Research
6
7
European wind services market characteristics:
service providers
I.3: Finding 3 // The current market is largely onshore and OEM
dominated, but significant changes are expected by 2020.
The ongoing dominance of OEMs in the offshore segment would
not preclude new entrants engaging as sub-contractors
Fig. 6 – European wind services market shares
Fig. 6 – European
wind
by segment
andservices
countrymarket
in 2011 shares
by segment and country in 2011
Fig. 5 – European wind energy operations and maintenance market in 2011 and 2020
Fig. 5 – European wind energy operations and maintenance market in 2011 and 2020
Fig. 5 – European wind energy operations and maintenance market in 2011 and 2020
9%
9%
9%
The market is divided between OEMs, Independent
Service Providers (ISPs) and in-house services
firms. OEMs currently dominate the market with a
63% market share in Europe (s. figure 6) and ISPs
accounting for 25%. Given their local market
expertise, accessibility and cost efficiency, ISPs are
expected to gain market share over OEMs. Most
wind farm owners (WFOs) who perform O&M
services are utilities with considerable experience
in managing large wind power projects.
As illustrated in figure 6, a significant variation in
market segmentation is evident across Europe. In
the UK and Spain, wind services are more strongly
dominated by OEMs. The higher proportion of offshore wind farms in the UK, where OEMs are more
strongly positioned, is a key explanation. ISPs have
a market share of 33% in Germany versus 25% in
the whole of Europe. This is primarily due to market
maturity and a larger proportion of the installed capacity being “off warranty”, allowing a more developed ISP market.
12 %
12 %%
12
12 %%
12
12 %%
10
10 %
33%
33%
33%
67%
20
%
20
25
% 30
%
%
30
25
%
% 33
%
33
%
Europe
Europ
Germae
Germany
ny
UK
UK
Spain
Spain
60
%
60
% 68
%
68
%
56
%
56
%
63
%
63
%
67%
67%
91%
91%
91%
Onshore Wind O&M Market
Offshore Wind O&M Market
Onshore Wind O&M Market
Onshore Wind O&M Market
Offshore
Wind O&M Market
Source:
GBI Research
Offshore Wind O&M Market
Source: GBI Research
Source: GBI Research
European wind services market characteristics:
onshore vs. offshore
The European market is currently dominated by
the onshore segment with 91 % of 2011 revenues.
This is expected to decrease to only 67 % by 2020
(s. figure 5) with significantly higher offshore
growth rates compared to onshore (CAGR of 19 %
vs. 4%). The higher offshore growth reflects both
the significant new expected capacity additions as
well as the significantly higher maintenance costs
associated with offshore installations. There are
some territories (such as the UK) that have gathered significant experience in the offshore segment. For these, the offshore wind services market
is already more important than the onshore market.
8
O&M (Operation & Maintenance)
O&M (Operation & Maintenance)
O&M (Operation & Maintenance)
OEM
OEM
ISP
ISP
WFO (In-house)
WFO (In-house)
Source: GBI Research
Source: GBI Research
The strong offshore growth rates reflect both the
significant increase in serviceable installed capacity
as well as the fact that annual O&M charges for
offshore wind projects are estimated to be two to
four times higher than onshore largely as a result
of the harsh and volatile maritime environment and
higher logistics costs such as port infrastructure,
vessel and assembly facility costs and higher
servicing costs. The O&M costs of a wind farm
account for 10 % to 15% of the total cost of power
generation onshore and 25% or higher offshore.
9
Fig. 7 – Offshore: How will the market share change over the next five years?
Fig. 7 – Offshore: How will the market share change over the next five years?
Percentage
Percentage
of respondents
of respondents
60%
60%
2,9%
2,9%
52,9%
52,9%
5,7%
5,7%
51,4%
51,4%
50%
50%
40%
40%
9,1%
9,1%
30%
30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%
12,1%
12,1%
5,7%
5,7%
2,9%
2,9%
OEM
OEM
Decrease
Decrease
24,2%
24,2%
20,6%
20,6%
18,6%
18,6%
30,3%
30,3%
Equal
Equal
ISPs
ISPs
Increase
Increase
In-house
In-house
Strong increase
Strong increase
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Competitive outlook
Wind services competition is set to intensify in the
near term. An increasing number of European wind
turbines are completing their initial OEM warranty
service contracts with a significant increase in
post-warranty maintenance contracts. This is a key
driver of medium term wind service revenues and
will strongly influence competitive behavior between
OEMs and ISPs as wind farm operators seek to
sign new O&M contracts. In addition, the increased
demand for the refurbishment of components
will also provide attractive entry points for ISPs.
Generators and gearboxes typically need
refurbishment twice in a wind turbine generator’s
life and the significant number of turbines installed
in 2004 to 2005 will need refurbishment in the
short term.
European ISPs have recognised the significant opportunity to gain market share in the post-warranty
market and gain access to new markets such as
in Italy, France and Poland as well as to enter the
offshore market. A number of European ISPs have
also taken the step of expanding internationally to
the North American market.
10
To maintain their market share and to lock out ISPs,
OEMs are increasingly signing long-term contracts
ranging from five years to 20 years for both new
and existing customers. This compares with
contract durations of only two to five years in the
recent past. This shift to long-term contracts
by OEMs is not only a defensive strategy to protect
against ISP market share gains but is also in
response to project financiers who are increasingly
demanding long-term service contracts to lower
cash flow volatility, and wind farm owners that are
also seeking performance guarantees and stability.
The decrease in OEM market share is also
supported by our survey respondents with 46%
expecting a strong to heavy decoupling of the
services business from the OEMs in their onshore
home markets over the next five years. This
reduces to 26% for the offshore market, possibly
reflecting the higher barriers to entry, capital
intensity and risk profile (s. figure 7).
In-house market share gains are likely to be from
energy companies with a strong track record and
scale in managing large wind parks.
The increasing growth opportunities for ISPs both
in existing markets and new territories as well as
the higher capital intensity required in servicing the
offshore market are likely to present attractive
investment opportunities for both strategic and
private equity investors.
11
Part II
European wind services – opportunities, threats and challenges
II.1: Finding 4 //
Offshore has the highest profitability expectations
and the greatest scope for efficiency improvements
II.2: Finding 5 //
Significant O&M cost reductions are likely be realised through
technological improvements and reductions in offshore transport
and logistics
Profitability and efficiency improvements
Cost reduction potential
Fig. 9 – What potential do you see for margins based
on efficiency improvements?
Fig. 9 – What potential do you see for margins based
on efficiency improvements?
Fig. 9 – What potential do you see for margins based
Onshore on efficiency improvements?
Onshore
Fig. 9 – What potential do you see for margins based
on efficiency improvements?
14%
17%
Onshore
Fig. 9 – What potential do you see for margins based
14%
17% improvements?
on efficiency
Onshore
Onshore
Percentage
Percentage of
of respondents
respondents
50%
69%
69%
69%
Offshore
Offshore
Offshore
Offshore
41,3%
37,0%
0%
11%
69%
9%
11%
9%
11%
9%
11%
9%
30%
30%
50%
20%
17,4%
10%
11%
69%
9%
30%
34,8%
30%
14%
17%
47,8%
40%
14%
17%
Offshore
Fig. 8 – What changes to EBIT margins would you expect in the wind service business
in the future?
14%
17%
50%
30%
50%
30%
10,9%
4,4%
0%
4,4%
Strongly declining
Onshore
Declining
Constant
Offshore
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Rising
2,2%
Strongly rising
50%
Barely
50%
Barely
Moderate
Strongly
Heavily
Moderate
Strongly
Heavily
Source:Barely
Deloitte/TaylorModerate
Wessing – European
Wind Services Study
Strongly
Heavily
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
12
In our survey, 45% of respondents report that turbine technology offers the
highest potential for onshore O&M cost reduction followed by spare part /
materials and transportation / logistics (s. figure 10).
Offshore cost reduction potential is assessed as highest in the areas of
transportation and logistics and technology. Logistics savings in the offshore
segment are expected to come from improved specification, maintenance
vessel availability and more effectively planned maintenance.
Technology cost savings will be most strongly driven by the switch to direct
drive turbine technologies which offer a high potential for cost savings by
eliminating the gearbox, which is one of the major causes of repairs, and also
reducing parts by up to 50%. A large number of leading turbine manufacturers
are moving towards gearless turbines after certain highly publicised gearbox
failures in the last four years. The gearbox is one of the main causes of breakdowns, requiring regular repairs in a turbine. This need is eliminated by the DDT
technology. This is particularly attractive for the larger turbines in the offshore
segment. While offering scope for cost reduction, DDT at the same time poses
a services revenue threat due to lower maintenance requirements.
Barely
Moderate
Strongly
Heavily
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Barely
Moderate
Strongly
Heavily
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Fig. 10 – What offers the highest potential for service cost reduction?
Fig. 10 – What offers the highest potential for service cost reduction?
Fig. 10 – What offers the highest potential for service cost reduction?
Fig. 10 – What offers the highest potential for service cost reduction?
80%
80%
80%
28,9%
80%
70%
28,9%
70%
28,9%
70%
28,9%
70%
48,9%
60%
48,9%
60%
48,9%
60%
48,9%
60%
50%
50%
50%
44,7%
50%
40%
44,7%
40%
44,7%
6,7%
40%
44,7%
40%
30%
6,7%
6,7%
29,8%
30%
6,7%
30%
29,8%
29,8%
30%
20%
29,8%
20%
20%
8,9%
20%
12,8%
10%
8,9%
12,8%
8,9%
10%
6,4%
12,8%
10%
8,9%
0%
12,8%
10%
6,4%
6,4%
Technology
Spare parts/
Transportation Data monitoring/
0%
6,4%
0%
Technology
Spare parts/
Transportation
Data
monitoring/
improvements
material
costs and
logistic costs Data
SCADA/IT
costs
0%
Technology
Spare parts/
Transportation
monitoring/
improvements
material
costs and
logistic costs Data
SCADA/IT
costs
Technology
Spare
parts/
Transportation
monitoring/
of
turbines
improvements
material costs and logistic costs SCADA/IT costs
of turbines
improvements
material costs and logistic costs SCADA/IT costs
of turbines
of turbines
Onshore
Offshore
Onshore
Offshore
Onshore
Offshore
Onshore
Offshore
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
ofofrespondents
ofrespondents
of
respondents
respondents
Survey respondents have strongly differentiated between the future profitability
trends in onshore and offshore. In the onshore segment, either constant or
declining margins are expected by a significant majority (s. figure 8). This is
likely to reflect a more mature industry, lower barriers to entry and increasing
competition relative to offshore.
The offshore O&M market is largely expected to demonstrate either constant
or rising margins. This is likely to reflect the higher barriers to entry, supplier
concentration, and strong cost reduction potential with associated scope for
margin capture.
As presented in figure 9, survey respondents were optimistic as to the scope
for efficiency improvements with the most significant potential being offshore.
31% and 61% of respondents see strong to heavy scope for efficiency improvements in onshore and offshore respectively. The offshore market is likely to
benefit from significant ongoing scale economies, technology improvements
and learning curve benefits. O&M cost reduction is critical also for the future
competitiveness of offshore wind versus other generation sources, however
the level of cost reductions that can be achieved still has a high uncertainty.
This is likely to dampen the enthusiasism of new entrants. However, the strong
growth prospects, scope for margin improvement and scope for technological
and work flow differentiation make offshore a lucrative segment.
The increased use of condition monitoring systems
by wind farm operators improve spare part ordering,
work scheduling and the planning of refurbishment
activities. This gives wind farm operators significant
control over the timings of repair and services and
improves plant availability. The need for plant visits
by technical crews is also reduced as minor repairs
can be addressed remotely.
Other technologies such as tension control
measurement technology can also pose a revenue
threat for wind services. It is a technology for
bolted joints on turbines and maintains tension
across the bolted joint. This prevents up to 90 % of
bolted joint failures that arise from insufficient bolt
tension in wind turbine installations and can save
50 % of bolted joint maintenance.
4,4%
4,4%
4,4%
2,1%
4,4%
2,1%
Personnel
2,1% fees
2,1% fees
Personnel
Personnel fees
Personnel fees
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
13
II.3: Finding 6 //
The most important requirements for successful services companies
are price, quality and responsiveness
Success factors
The key success factors have a high uniformity
between onshore and offshore: quality and the
speed of service are paramount as these are crucial
for ensuring high turbine availability (s. figure 11).
Both OEMs and ISPs will give close consideration
to how to effectively manage logistic costs but at
the same time improve reaction times. Some OEMs
have chosen to significantly build out their geographic technician footprint to lower onshore
logistic costs. Large OEMs will also look to partner
with local ISPs to offset logistics costs and maintain
more efficient and flexible manpower structures.
As noted earlier, both wind park project financiers
and operators are increasingly demanding
longer contract durations to manage risk to cash
flows, and OEMs in particular are responding with
contract durations of up to twenty years.
However, a lot of additional potential for ISPs lies
in the provision of technical management services
which in most cases are not offered by OEMs (but
are also often provided in house by larger WFOs).
It is likely that a number of wind farm operators will
increasingly seek to more discretely define the
service scope provided by OEMs and ISPs, with an
increasing trend towards in-sourcing in particular
in respect of condition monitoring activities.
In-sourcing of condition monitoring will allow
operators to more actively steer maintenance programs and still allow service delivery flexibility.
All these arrangements unavoidably increase the
demand for effective supply chain management
and also the management of interfaces between
OEMs. ISPs and in-house WFOs. This demand is
more complex in the offshore segment in particular
in respect of vessel availability, port infrastructure
and engineering services.
II.4: Finding 7 //
European firms are expected to be well positioned to counter
international market entrants
Fig.
12 12
– How
dodo
you
rate
thethe
competitiveness
of of
your
home
Fig.
– How
you
rate
competitiveness
your
home
Fig. 12 – How do you rate the competitiveness of your home
country's
service
companies
in comparison
to to
foreign
firms?
country's
service
companies
in comparison
foreign
firms?
companies
in comparisonof
toyour
foreign
firms?
Fig. country's
12 – How service
do you rate
the competitiveness
home
country's service companies in comparison to foreign firms?
13%
13%
13%
13%
2 2
% %2 7%7%
7%
2 %
7%
%
37%
37%
37%
37%
41%
41%
41%
41%
International players
92 % of the survey participants see European firms as well positioned as
compared to foreign entrants (s. figure 12). This can be explained by the local
market advantages in delivering against the success factors outlined on the
previous page. Compared to non-European competitors, the service providers
in Europe have a much stronger local logistics network and delivery footprint,
understand local market conditions and are more responsive to market
requirements and developments. The long operating history in the mature
European wind services market is also likely to give the local European service
providers deeper experience and competence and underpin service quality
and cost performance. The Asian competitors are likely to be OEMs gaining
medium term market share principally in Eastern Europe and in the onshore
segment. The Asian wind services market is most strongly dominated by
OEMs with an 87 % market share in 2011 (versus 63% in Europe).
Very
badly
positioned
Very
badly
positioned
Very badly positioned
Badly
positioned
Badly
positioned
Very
badly
positioned
Badly positioned
Comparably
positioned
Comparably
positioned
Badly
positioned
Comparably
positioned
Well
postitoned
Well
postitoned
Comparably
positioned
Well postitoned
Very
well
positioned
Very
well
positioned
Well
postitoned
Very
well positioned
Very well positioned
Source:
Deloitte/Taylor
Wessing
– European
Wind
Services Study
Source:
Deloitte/Taylor
Wessing
– European
Wind
Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
–
are
most
important
requirements
a
company?
Fig. Fig.
11 –11
What
are the
most
important
requirements
to ato
service
company?
Fig.
11
– What
What
are the
the
most
important
requirements
to
a service
service
company?
60,0%
60,0%
60,0%
67,4%
67,4%
67,4%
20%20%
20%
17,5%
17,5%
13,0%
13,0%
13,0% 17,5%
69,6%
69,6%
67,5%
69,6%
67,5%
67,5%
60%60%
60%
40%40%
40%
46,3%
46,3%
46,3%
26,1%
26,1%
26,1%
58,7%
58,7%
58,7%
37,5%
37,5%
37,5%
41,5%
41,5%
41,5%
12,5%
12,5%
12,5%
8,9%8,9%
8,9%
50,0%
50,0%
50,0%
46,7%
46,7%
46,7%
23,9%
23,9%
23,9%
0% 0%
0%
Service
quality
Service
scope
Service
quality
Service
scope
Service
quality
Service
scope
speed
of
and and
speed
of reaction
and
speed
of reaction
reaction
Pricing
Duration
of
Pricing
and and
of contract
Pricing
and Duration
Duration
of contract
contract
adjustment
priceprice
adjustment
price
adjustment
Strongly
(Onshore)
Heavily
(Onshore)
Strongly
(Offshore)
Heavily
(Offshore)
Strongly
(Onshore)
(Onshore)
(Offshore)
(Offshore)
Strongly
(Onshore) Heavily
Heavily
(Onshore) Strongly
Strongly
(Offshore) Heavily
Heavily
(Offshore)
Source:
Deloitte/Taylor
Wessing
– European
Services Study
Source:
Deloitte/Taylor
Wessing
– European
WindWind
Services Study
Source:
Deloitte/Taylor
Wessing
– European
Wind
Services Study
14
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
of respondents
of of
respondents
of
respondents
respondents
80%80%
80%
Percentage
Percentageofofrespondents
respondents
Percentage of respondents
100%
100%
100%
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Fig. 13 – In your opinion, where will your home market's strongest competitors come from in the next five years?
Fig. 13 – In your opinion, where will your home market's strongest competitors come from in the next five years?
Fig. 13 – In your opinion, where will your home market's strongest competitors come from in the next five years?
Fig. 50%
13 – In your opinion, where will your home market's strongest competitors come from in the next five years?
50%
50%
43,8%
50%
40%
43,8%
40%
43,8%
40%
43,8%
40%
30%
31,3%
31,3%
30%
31,3%
31,3%
30%
31,3%
31,3%
30%
31,3%
31,3%
20%
20%
20%
20%
12,5%
10%
12,5%
10%
12,5%
10%
12,5%
0%
10%
0%
0%
0% Central Europe
0%
Eastern Europe
Asia
North America
Others*
0% Central Europe
Eastern Europe
Asia
North America
Others*
0%
0% Central Europe
Eastern Europe
Asia
North America
Others*
Central Europe
Eastern Europe
Asia
North America
Others*
* No responses in respect of
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
* No
responses
respect
of
Latin
America,inAfrica,
Australia,
and UAE
* No
responses
respect
of
Latin
America,inAfrica,
Australia,
and UAE
Latin
America,
Africa,
Australia,
and UAE
* No responses in respect of
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Latin America, Africa, Australia, and UAE
15
Part III
Investment in wind services
II.5: Finding 8 //
The largest industry challenges will be the availability
of infrastructure and qualified personnel
III.1: Finding 9 //
Wind services are viewed favourably compared to other renewable
sectors. Growth prospects and internationalization expansion are
particularly attractive
Industry challenges
Investors’ views on the industry
The lack of qualified technicians to undertake wind
park O&M activities is one of the biggest challenges
in the wind services business globally. The technicians must be able to manage around the physically
challenging environment, working at great
heights and understand the relevant serviceable
technologies such as hydraulics, mechanics and IT.
The training period to acquire the required skills
is lengthy and market demand has significantly
outpaced the availability of new technicians.
Many wind OEMs, ISPs and WFOs are planning to
double or triple their workforce in the next three
to four years underlining the size of the manpower
challenge.
Managing the strong growth in wind services and
right sizing the required infrastructure is viewed
as a significant challenge both onshore and offshore. This includes having appropriate systems and
processes in place, building up Supervisory Control
and Data Acquisition (SCADA) infrastructure as well
as appropriately managing logistics infrastructure
versus alternate models such as outsourcing.
For the offshore segment in particular, the opera-
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
80%
80%
80%
53,8%
53,8%
44,4% 53,8%
44,4%
44,4%
60%
60%
60%
40%
40%
40%
11,1%
11,1%
11,1%
68,9%
68,9%
68,9%
15,8%
15,8%
15,8%
55,3%
55,3%
55,3%
42,2%
42,2% 38,5%
42,2% 38,5%
38,5%
29,6%
29,6%
29,6%
34,2%
34,2%
34,2%
31,6%
31,6%
31,6%
18,2%
18,2%
18,2%
52,6%
52,6%
45,5% 52,6%
45,5%
45,5%
54,6% 55,3%
54,6% 55,3%
54,6% 55,3%
20,9%
20,9%
20,9%
46,5%
46,5%
46,5%
21,1%
21,1%
21,1%
55,3%
55,3%
55,3%
20%
20%
20%
0%
0%
0% Qualified employees Growth & related
Access to knowQualified employees Growth
& related
Access
to knowinfrastructure
(e.g. technology)
Qualified employees Growth
& related how
Access
to knowinfrastructure
how
(e.g. technology)
infrastructure how (e.g. technology)
Strongly (Onshore)
Strongly (Onshore)
Strongly (Onshore)
Heavily (Onshore)
Heavily (Onshore)
Heavily (Onshore)
Criteria which matter most in evaluating wind
services targets are:
> low market risk;
> clearly defined regulatory regimes;
> lower technological risk; and
> experienced and successful management teams.
When it comes to specific investor value creation
strategies, 61% of the respondents would focus on
buy and build activities while 31% would focus on
international expansion (s. figure 16). This is likely
to include leveraging capabilities developed in the
more mature wind markets into Eastern Europe
as well as taking offshore wind expertise into new
jurisdictions.
Fig. 15 – Which characteristics of the wind service sector make this industry interesting for you?
Fig. 15 – Which characteristics of the wind service sector make this industry interesting for you?
Fig. 15 – Which characteristics of the wind service sector make this industry interesting for you?
Fig. 14 – What are the most important industry challenges?
Fig. 14 – What are the most important industry challenges?
Fig. 14 – What are the most important industry challenges?
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
16
More than 50 % of respondents view wind services
as more attractive compared to other renewable
energy investments such as solar, biomass or geothermal energy.
The onshore and offshore segments are differentiated as to the specific elements making them
interesting for investors. The offshore segment is
viewed attractive as a result of its high growth
potential and potential for realising scale economies
(s. figure 15). The onshore segment’s secure cash
flows and risk/return profile are particularly
attractive.
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
of respondents
ofofrespondents
respondents
> finding qualified employees, in particular with
engineering and logistic backgrounds;
> managing growth and the scaling up of the
required infrastructure (e.g., maritime vessels)
and
> extracting cost savings through economies
of scale and scope
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
ofofrespondents
ofrespondents
respondents
The survey respondents identified industry
challenges that are not atypical of fast growing
sectors (s. figure 14). These challenges include:
ting environment issues and immaturity of the market heighten the importance
of access to the right know-how and technologies and ensuring that the risk/
return parameters are commercially managed.
Financing, the availability of spare parts, wages, or technical standards are not
viewed as challenges for either onshore or offshore.
The wind services market dynamics will significantly depend on how the industry players view and deal with the above challenges. There is a need to strike
a difficult balancing act between capturing market growth opportunities and
ensuring the right level of delivery capability and risk parameters. Certainly the
financial strength, most likely to be associated with larger OEMs, will be
increasingly important in being able to absorb certain risks and scale the
business in particular in looking at offshore and committing to longer contract
durations. ISPs or smaller players might need to secure additional growth
capital or consider merger or joint venture opportunities to both fully realise
economies of scale and manage risk.
80%
80%
80%
60%
60%
60%
40%
40%
40%
Strongly (Offshore)
Strongly (Offshore)
Strongly (Offshore)
Economies of
Economies
of
scale/scope
Economies
of
scale/scope
scale/scope
Heavily (Offshore)
Heavily (Offshore)
Heavily (Offshore)
92,3%
92,3%
92,3% 38,5%
38,5%
38,5%
46,2%
46,2%
46,2%
23,1%
23,1%
23,1%
8,3%
8,3%
61,5%
61,5% 58,3%
8,3%
58,3%
61,5%
58,3%
64,3%
64,3%
64,3% 15,4%
15,4%
15,4%
38,5%
38,5%
38,5%
20%
20%
20%
0%
0%
0%
Liability/risk
Liability/risk
Liability/risk
7,1%
7,1%
85,7%
7,1%
85,7%
85,7% 15,4%
15,4%
15,4%
61,5%
61,5%
61,5%
Scaling/
Growth perspective
Secure cash flow
Scaling/
Growth perspective
Secure cash flow
consolidation effects
consolidation
Scaling/effects Growth perspective
Secure cash flow
consolidation effects
Interesting (Onshore)
Very interesting (Onshore)
Interesting (Onshore)
Very interesting (Onshore)
Interesting (Onshore)
(Offshore)
Very interesting
interesting (Onshore)
(Offshore)
Interesting
Very
(Offshore)
(Offshore)
Interesting (Offshore)
Very interesting (Offshore)
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Fig.
Fig. 16
16 –
– Which
Which value
value creation
creation strategy
strategy would
would you
you pursue
pursue
for aa wind
wind
service
acquisition?
for
service
acquisition?
Fig. 16 – Which
value
creation
strategy would you pursue
for a wind service acquisition?
31%
31%
31%
61%
61%
61%
8%
8%
8%
Risk/earnings ratio
Risk/earnings ratio
Risk/earnings ratio
Buy and
and build
build
Buy
Buy
and build
Consolidation
Consolidation
Consolidation
International
International expansion
expansion
International expansion
Source: Deloitte/Taylor
Deloitte/Taylor Wessing
Wessing –
– European
European Wind
Wind Services Study
Services Study
Source:
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
17
An investment in a wind services company is
viewed as a medium term investment. When it
comes to the question how long an investor would
keep a wind services company in the investment
portfolio, 57 % (onshore) and 46 % (offshore) of
respondents viewed a hold period of less than
seven years as appropriate (s. figure 18a and 18b).
III.2: Finding 10 //
Wind service - Central Europe the place to invest (now)
on a mid term basis
Fig. 18a – Onshore: How long would you expect to hold
Fig. 18a – Onshore: How long would you expect to hold
a wind services company in your investment portfolio?
a wind services company in your investment portfolio?
This is consistent with Finding 1 where the expected
market growth and geographic expansion opportunities and associated buy and build strategies lend
themselves well to realising better exit opportunities
over the medium term. Respondents viewed offshore wind as having a slightly longer investment
horizon perhaps reflecting the earlier stage of
maturity of the sector.
Fig. 18b – Offshore: How long would you expect to hold
Fig. 18b – Offshore: How long would you expect to hold
a wind services company in your investment portfolio?
a wind services company in your investment portfolio?
15%
15%
21%
21%
Based on the currently installed capacity in Central
Europe and given market potential for wind services
it is not surprising that 60 % of the respondents
(onshore) and 45% (offshore) see Central Europe
as the most likely region to offer financing in the
following 5 years (s. Figure 17). Europe evidently is
the place where at this point in time the expertise,
the manpower and the market demand for wind
energy services is strongest. But this may well
change over the next years (see Finding 2).With an
initial investment in a service provider in Europe
now, an investor will be best positioned to then
expand into future growth markets such as Eastern
Europe (10%), Asia (10%), and North America (17%).
Investment in wind services companies appears
to be resilient to the vagaries of the European
economy. Only 14% of the respondents said that
the economic downturn in Europe strongly
influenced their decisions.
70%
70%
Percentage
Percentageof
ofrespondents
respondents
31%
31%
36%
36%
> 7 years
> 7 years
5 to 7 years
5 to 7 years
3 to 4 years
3 to 4 years
≤ 2 years
≤ 2 years
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
> 7 years
> 7 years
5 to 7 years
5 to 7 years
3 to 4 years
3 to 4 years
≤ 2 years
≤ 2 years
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Fig. 19 – Which debt/equity ratio do you rate to be realistic?
Fig. 19 – Which debt/equity ratio do you rate to be realistic?
8%
8%
23%
23%
64,7
64,7
%
%
50%
50%
40%
40%
47,1
47,1
%
%
46%
46%
30%
30%
20%
20%
17,7
17,7
%
%
10%
10%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Cent.
Cent. Europe
Europe
Onshore
Onshore
North
North Amer.
Amer.
11,8
11,8
%
%
0%
0%
East.
East. Europe
Europe
Offshore
Offshore
Source: Deloitte/Taylor
Deloitte/Taylor Wessing
Wessing –
– European
European Wind
Wind Services Study
Services Study
Source:
18
54%
54%
In addition, 54% of the participants of the study
consider a debt/equity ratio in the range of 51 – 100%
as realistic, which suggests a stable risk return
profile and is broadly in line with the typical 67%
rule of thumb applied for non-financial services
industries (s. figure 19).
Fig. 17
17 –
– In
In which
which regions
regions are
are you
you likely
likely to
to offer
offer financing
financing to
to the
the wind
wind service
service sector
sector in
in the
the next
next five
five years?
years?
Fig.
60%
60%
43%
43%
11,8
11,8
%
%
0%
0%
Asia
Asia
5,9%
0%
5,9% 0%
5,9%
0%
5,9% 0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Latin
Latin Amer.
Amer.
Africa
Africa
Australia
Australia
UAE
UAE
23%
23%
0%–25%
0%–25%
26%–50%
26%–50%
51%–75%
51%–75%
76%–100%
76%–100%
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
19
III.5: Finding 11 //
Midsize and full service maintenance –
the perfect target company
We asked investors what would be the perfect
target: 42 % of the surveyed experts would prefer
a midsize company with a turnover from €10 to 20
m. For another 25% the perfect target would be
either less than €10 m. or between €20 to 200 m.
(s. figure 20). In the view of the respondents these
companies should provide full maintenance (50 %),
preventive maintenance (10 %) or individual
services (10 %).
Fig. 20 – What would be the preferred size of a target
company?
8%
25%
25%
42%
When considering which aspects are important
in evaluating whether a target is attractive, experience and successful management (i.e. know-how
and a highly skilled workforce) is by far the most
important factor (ranked by 60 % of the respondents as very important). Other important factors
are – as always in the renewable energy business
– clear and reliable government guidelines for incentives such as a predictable feed-in tariff regime
and lower market risks (s. figure 21). The relatively
high ranking for certifications seems to reflect the
need for quality and well-established processes
behind the service. Highly ranked is also the availability of other sources of financing, which reflects
possible concerns around current debt markets and
the availability of funds.
inc inincCcinc CC C
en eelnenean leleaalea
tiv ttivrivtgiv rrggr g
es eesuseids uuididuid
an aanenalin eelilieli
d ddnde nneene
Lo LLooLo sup ssuuspspufop ssffsoofo
w www po ppoorpo rr r
te tteete rt rrttrt
ch cchhch
no nnoono
log lologglog
y yy y
r rr r
Ri RRi iRi
sk sskksk isk isiskkisk
s a ssaas a
re rreere
Se SSeeSe
in ininin
rv rrvvrv
ice iciceeice sur ssuursrur
Av AAvvAv
a aa a
ail aaililail
L
L
L
L
ev eevvev ble bbleleble
ab aabbab
el eel l el
ilit iliiltitilit
A
A
A
A
y yy y
gr ggrrgr
ee eeeeee
th tothfhtohooffooof o
m mmm
e eeteh tthhth
gr ggrreg ee e
en eennen
ow oowrwofiw rrfifir fi
ts ttssts
n
n
n
n
th tthhath aa a
C
C
C
C
ncp nnccnc
p
p
p
e
e
e
e
Ex EExxEx lan lalaninalan iaia ia
r rr r
pe ppeepe s slssso l lssoloso tific ttifiifitccific
rie rrieierie for ffoorufror r uurrur ati aattiai ti
c
c
c
c
nc nnccnc th tthheth ee e on oonnon
ed eedded e ees et sstts t s ss s
ta ttaaota oo o
Lit LLititLit and aanndadnd rge rrggsertegr ssttrsrtr
tle ttleletle
su ssuusu t c tteccnt gc eenngegng
c cc c o oo ho hh h
av aavvav
e tteete
ail aaililail ces cceescses mp mmptm
s ss s a paanpa nn n
ab aabbab
ilit iliiltitilit ful mffuulflmuml mny nnyyny
y yy y
an aannan
of ooffof
ag aaggag
co ccooco
e ee e
m mmm
pe ppeepe menmmem
ee
tit ttitittit
t nnttnt
ive iviveeive
te tteete
ch cchhch
no nnoono
log lologglog
y yy y
Lo LLooLo
w www
m mmm
ar aarrar
ke kkeeke
Hi HHi iHi
gh gghhgh t ris ttrritsisris
k kk k
ba bbaaba
rri rrrri irri
er eerrer
No NNooNo Exis EExxEisisxis
s o ssoos o
f e ffeef e
ex eexxex ting ttinintgging
nt nnttnt
ag aaggag
ry rryyry
ge ggeege cus ccuuscsus
t
t
t
t
ra rraara
o
o
o
o
m
m
m
m
t tt t
er eerrer
(in ((einidn(ineedded
cl. ccld.l.cul. dduudu rel rreelrl el
tim ttiemimtdimeeded d ati aattiai ti
et eeitlltiegt ilililgigillig ons oonnossns
ab aababanb aannan
le leleclee cceece
fo ffoofroe rreere
r t rrttrq t qq q
he hheuehee uueeue
de ddsetedsessttsssts
al) aal)l)al)
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
Percentage
of respondents
of
ofofrespondents
respondents
respondents
Fig. 21 – Which aspects – from experience – matter most to your company when considering investing in the wind service sector?
Fig.
Fig. 21
21 –
– Which
Which aspects
aspects –
– from
from experience
experience –
– matter
matter most
most to
to your
your company
company when
when considering
considering investing
investing in
in the
the wind
wind service
service sector?
sector?
Fig. 21 – Which aspects – from experience – matter most to your company when considering investing in the wind service sector?
80%
80%
80%
80%
70%
70%
70%
70%
60%
60%
60%
60%
50%
50%
50%
50%
40%
40%
40%
40%
30%
30%
30%
30%
20%
20%
20%
20%
10%
10%
10%
10%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Unimportant
Unimportant
Unimportant
Unimportant
Less important
Less
Less important
important
Less important
Important
Important
Important
Important
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Source:
Source: Deloitte/Taylor
Deloitte/Taylor Wessing
Wessing –
– European
European Wind
Wind Services Study
Services Study
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
Very important
Very
Very important
important
Very important
Research Design and Methodology
Deloitte and Taylor Wessing commissioned GBI
Research to undertake primary and secondary
research on the Global and European wind services
markets. In addition, an online survey was undertaken of the onshore and offshore wind services
segments with a focus on:
> market developments;
> the competitive and regulatory environment;
> profitability, cost savings and efficiency
opportunities;
> industry challenges; and
> investor attitudes.
175 respondents across all sector stakeholders
participated in the survey, covering financiers, product /component producers, wind farm operators/
owners, energy suppliers, wind service providers
(OEMs and ISPs). Other respondents included a
number of specialists from other firms and
research /technology institutes. The country
responses follow the relative importance of the
wind services in the respective countries/regions
of Europe.
We thank the participants for the time taken to
complete the survey.
Turnover ≤ 10 m. €
Turnover 10 to 20 m. €
Turnover 20 to 200 m. €
Turnover > 200 m. €
Source: Deloitte/Taylor Wessing – European Wind Services Study
20
Project Team:
David Krüger and Michaela Bichler (Deloitte),
Carsten Bartholl, Peter Hellich
and Christian Knote (Taylor Wessing).
21
Contacts
Taylor Wessing Office Details
Taylor Wessing
Carsten Bartholl
Partner Hamburg
Dominic FitzPatrick
Partner London
+49 (0) 40 368 03 0
[email protected]
+44 (0) 20 7300 7000
[email protected]
Dr. Peter Hellich
Partner Munich
+49 (0) 89 210 38 0
[email protected]
Deloitte
David Krüger
Partner/ Chartered Accountant
Transaction Advisory Services, Munich
Cleantech Leader
+49 (0) 89 29036 8827
[email protected]
Nicolas De Witt
Partner Paris
+33 (0) 1 72 74 03 33
[email protected]
Beijing Ω
Unit 2307&08, West Tower, Twin Towers
B-12 Jianguomenwai Avenue
Chaoyang District
Beijing 100022
T. +86 (10) 6567 5886
Berlin
Ebertstraße 15
10117 Berlin
T. +49 (0) 30 88 56 36 0
Bratislava
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
Panenská 6
81103 Bratislava
T. +421 (0) 2 5263 2804
Brno Ω
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
Dominikánské námĕstí 4/5
602 00 Brno
T. +420 543 420 401
Brussels
Trône House
4 Rue du Trône
1000 Brussels
T. +32 (0) 2 289 6060
Budapest
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
Dorottya u. 1. III. em.
1051 Budapest
T. +36 (0) 1 327 04 07
Cambridge
24 Hills Road
Cambridge, CB2 1JP
T. +44 (0) 1223 446400
Dubai
26th Floor, Rolex Tower,
Sheikh Zayed Road · P.O. Box 33675
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
T. +971 (0) 4 309 1000
Düsseldorf
Benrather Straße 15
40213 Düsseldorf
T. +49 (0) 211 83 87 0
Munich
Isartorplatz 8
80331 Munich
T. +49 (0) 89 2 10 38 0
Paris
42 avenue Montaigne
75008 Paris
T. +33 (0) 1 72 74 03 33
Frankfurt
Senckenberganlage 20–22
60325 Frankfurt a.M.
T. +49 (0) 69 971 30 0
Prague
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
Prašné Brány 1
110 00 Prague 1
T. +420 224 81 92 16
Hamburg
Hanseatic Trade Center
Am Sandtorkai 41
20457 Hamburg
T. +49 (0) 40 36 80 30
Shanghai Ω
Unit 1509, United Plaza
No. 1468, Nanjing West Road
Shanghai 200040
T. +86 (0) 21 6247 7247
Kiev
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
Illinsky Business Center
vul. Illinska 8
04070 Kiev
T. +38 (0) 44 369 32 44
Singapore
RHTLaw Taylor Wessing LLP
Six Battery Road · #09-01, #10-01
Singapore 049909
T. +65 6381 6868
Klagenfurt Ω
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
Alter Platz 1
9020 Klagenfurt
T. +43 (0) 463 51 52 27
London
5 New Street Square
London EC4A 3TW
T. +44 (0) 20 7300 7000
Vienna
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
Schwarzenbergplatz 7
1030 Vienna
T. +43 (0) 1 716 55 0
Warsaw
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c
ul. Mokotowska 1
00-640 Warsaw
T. +48 (0) 22 579 89 00
Ω
22
Representative offices
23
Diese Studie wurde
klimaneutral produziert.
www.taylorwessing.com
> Europe > Middle East > Asia
© 2012 Taylor Wessing