Wednesday, 18 September 2024

Entry, Exit and Insolvencies in Australian Construction

 The number of businesses is at a record high



 

 

There has been a lot of attention on the increase in insolvencies of Australian construction businesses. In 2023-2024 the number of insolvencies was 3,882, which was the highest number across all industries, and the construction share of total insolvencies was 26 percent. However, the reporting of these numbers usually does not include any context, and therefore lacks perspective, and focusing on the number of insolvencies can be misleading if industry characteristics are not also considered. 

 

This post compares the insolvencies data from the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) with the data available from the Australian Bureau of Statistics publication Counts of Australian Businesses. The ABS data gives the number of businesses that enter and exit each quarter, and the number of businesses operating at the end of each quarter, and is published quarterly with data that goes back to June 2020 in its current format.

 

The ABS data is based on Australian Business Number (ABN) registrations and sourced from Australian Tax Office records of businesses that file a business activity statement and pay Goods and Services Tax (GST). An entry is an ABN that starts paying GST or restarts after a break of more than five quarters. An exit is an ABN that is no longer actively trading because the business has cancelled their ABN, ceased remitting GST, or the ABN has changed due to a merger or acquisition. Therefore exits occur when a business has closed, has been sold, has significantly changed structure, or is no longer operating in Australia. Importantly, insolvencies are only a small proportion of the number of exits. 

 

 

Insolvencies

 

Data on insolvencies comes from the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC). There are three data sets: insolvencies where an external administrator is appointed for the first time; for any later appointment of an administrator to that business; and for voluntary liquidations where a solvent business reports it is no longer operating. Figure 1 shows this data for three years to 2024. In those years there were only 185, 213 and 170 voluntary liquidations of insolvent construction firms that ceased operating.

 

Construction insolvencies where an administrator or controller was appointed for the first time went from 1,284 in 2021-2022, to 2,213 in 2022-2023, then up to 2,977 in 2023-2024. This was a significant increase, and is the number that is typically used in media reports on construction insolvencies (e.g. Australian Financial ReviewMacrobusiness). 

 

A better number includes businesses failing for a second time, or more, after a restructuring and agreement with creditors that allowed a business to continue. There were 355, 599 and 905 of these in the three years, so there was a big increase in construction businesses going into administration again in 2023-2024. Adding repeat insolvencies to first insolvencies and voluntary liquidations gives the total for all insolvencies.

 

Figure 1. Australian construction 2022-2024

 


Source: ASIC

 

 

Construction does have the highest number of insolvencies compared to other industries, but the construction share of total insolvencies has not been increasing, and was 25, 27 and 26 percent in those years. This is higher than the construction share of the total number of Australian businesses, which is 17 percent, but construction also has a higher proportion of micro and small businesses than other industries. 

 

Two of the reasons why construction businesses are more likely to become insolvent are this prevalence of micro and small firms and the knock-on effects on subcontractors when a contractor goes under, where many of the unsecured creditors will be subcontractors on their projects. Most subcontractors are micro or small businesses, and many are extremely vulnerable to a contractor’s insolvency. Businesses employing less than 5 people account for 65 percent of all construction businesses, and these businesses have little capital and few resources. Micro and small businesses have a much higher insolvency rate than larger businesses. 

 

Because of measures put in place to support industry during the Covid pandemic there were fewer insolvencies than usual in 2021-22, with a total of 1,639 construction businesses going into administration. The numbers for 2023 and 2024 are more typical, and these show a substantial increase in total insolvencies from 2,812 to 3,882.

 

However, in June 2024 there were 452,626 operating construction businesses, so the insolvency rate was less than one percent. Further, there are many more businesses in Construction than any other industry. The industry with the second highest number is Professional, Scientific and Technical Services with 344,311 businesses, the third is Rental, Hiring and Real Estate Services with 298,764 businesses, and the fourth is Transport, Postal and Warehousing with 237,326 businesses.

 

Construction Industry Entry and Exit

 

How does the number of ASIC insolvencies compare to the ABS Count of Businesses data?

The ABS numbers for annual business exits are much larger than the number of insolvencies, and were 69,972 in 2021-2022, 78,667 in 2022-2023, and 81,354 in 2023-2024. Again, there was a substantial increase between 2022 and 2023 as pandemic measures were unwound, but the increase between 2023 and 2024 was not as great. 

 

Clearly, insolvency is not the main driver of exits from the construction industry, as the cumulative total was only 8,333 insolvencies over the three years. Some unknown proportion of exits will be businesses that have paused operation, and stopped paying GST for a couple of years, probably because of market conditions. 

 

The ABS data is quarterly, and for exits in particular there is a marked seasonal pattern, with a cycle that peaks in the December quarter and has a low in the March or June quarters. As Figure 2 shows, there is a different cycle for entry, which peaks in the September quarter. What is driving these regular cycles of entry and exit is a matter for speculation. Entries can be births (new ABNs) or other (an ABN that has been reclassified or restarted GST payments). For Construction, in most quarters there are more births than others, for example in the June 2024 quarter there were 12,229 births and 10,753 other entries. 

 

There are, over time, more entries than exits, except for the December quarter. The average quarterly number for exits since 2020 was 17,886 and for entries was 21,574. The net result is that the number of construction businesses has been increasing steadily since 2020, rising from 397,920 in June 2020 to 452,626 in June 2024, a 14 percent increase in the number of businesses. If the number of businesses is representative of industry capacity and the supply side of construction, these numbers suggest industry capacity has been increasing.

 

Figure 2. Australian construction 

 


Source: ABS 8165

 

The ABS also has overall entry and exits by employment size, although this is not given for individual industries. In 2023-2024 Non-employing businesses had an exit rate of 17.7 percent, and businesses employing 1 to 4 people an exit rate of 9.5 percent. These rates are much higher than those for larger businesses, those employing 5 to 19 people was 5.5 percent, businesses employing 20 to 199 people 3.1 percent, and those employing over 200 has an exit rate of 3.2 percent. As noted above, exit rates are not the same as insolvencies, but this is good evidence of a higher rate of insolvencies in the micro and small businesses that are the great majority of construction firms. 

 

The ABS calculates industry entry and exit rates as percentages, and Construction does not have the highest rates. As table 1 shows, there are many industries with higher entry and exit rates, although no other industry has a larger number of businesses than Construction. In the 2023 December quarter the exit rate was higher than the 5.8 percent for Construction in five industries, and around the same rate in five others. In the 2023 September quarter the entry rate was higher in six industries, and around the same in seven others. In those quarters for all Australian businesses the exit rate was 5.3 percent and the entry rate was 5.5 percent, so the exit rate for Construction was slightly higher and the entry rate exactly the same. 

 

Table 1. Number of businesses, entry and exit rates in peak months, by industry


 

 

Construction industry sub-divisions

 

The ABS also provides this data for the three industry sub-divisions. The numbers for operating businesses are of particular interest. In June 2024 there were 10,542 Engineering construction businesses, 108,764 Building construction businesses, and 332,320 Construction services businesses. These sub-divisions had 2.3, 24 and 73.7 percent of the total number of construction businesses.

 

The same pattern of a December quarter high for exits and a September quarter high for entries also holds for the sub-divisions, with December 2022 having the largest number of exits for all three sub-divisions. The March 2023 quarter was the low for entries for Building construction and Construction services, and March 2024 the low for entries in Engineering construction. Figures 3, 4 and 5 have this data.

 

Figure 3. Australian Building construction 

 


Source: ABS 8165

 

 

Figure 4. Engineering construction

 


Source: ABS 8165

 

 

Figure 5. Construction services

 


Source: ABS 8165

 

For all three sub-divisions the total number of businesses has been increasing. Between June 2020 and June 2024 the number of Engineering construction businesses went from 10,052 to 10,542, Building construction businesses from 90,722 to 108,764, and Construction services businesses from 296,246 to 332,320. As percentage increases over four years these were 5, 20, and 13 percent respectively. The average quarterly number of exits and entry between 2020 and 2024 for Engineering were 363 and 395 businesses, for Building were 4,666 and 5,837 businesses, and for Construction services were 12,858 and 15,543 businesses. 


Conclusion

 

ASIC data shows a total of 3,882 construction businesses becoming insolvent in 2023-2024, and the industry had the highest number of failures with 26 percent of all insolvencies. However, this needs to be kept in context, because Construction by far the largest number of businesses compared to other industries, and in 2024 had 17 percent of all businesses, and with over 450,000 businesses has a failure rate of less than one percent. It is misleading to claim Construction has an exceptionally high number of insolvencies. 

 

The ABS numbers for annual business exits are much larger than the number of insolvencies, and were 69,972 in 2021-22, 78,667 in 2022-23, and 81,354 in 2023-24. There was a substantial increase between 2022 and 2023 as pandemic measures were unwound, but the increase between 2023 and 2024 was not as great. Clearly, the insolvency of a few thousand businesses is not the main driver of exits from the construction industry.

 

The ABS data for exits has a marked seasonal pattern, with a cycle that peaks in the December quarter and a low in the March or June quarters. There is a different cycle for entry, which peaks in the September quarter. What is driving these regular cycles of entry and exit in Construction is a matter for speculation. 

 

Many industries have higher entry and exit rates than Construction, although no other industry has a larger number of businesses. In the 2023 December quarter the exit rate in five industries was higher than in Construction and around the same rate in five others. In the 2023 September quarter the entry rate was higher in six industries, and around the same in seven others. 

 

There are more entries than exits, except for the December quarter. The average quarterly number for exits since 2020 was 17,886 and for entries was 21,574, so the number of construction businesses has been increasing steadily since 2020, rising from 397,920 in June 2020 to 452,626 in June 2024, a 14 percent increase in the number of businesses. If the number of businesses is representative of industry capacity and the supply side of Construction, these numbers suggest industry capacity has been increasing.

 

For all three sub-divisions the total number of businesses has been increasing. Between June 2020 and June 2024 the number of Engineering Construction businesses went from 10,052 to 10,542, Building Construction businesses from 90,722 to 108,764, and Construction Services businesses from 296,246 to 332,320. These sub-divisions had 2.3, 24 and 73.7 percent of the total number of construction businesses, and their percentage increases over four years were 5, 20, and 13 percent respectively. 

 

Construction businesses are more likely to exit or become insolvent because two thirds are micro or small businesses employing less than 5 people, which have a higher rate of insolvency than larger businesses. Subcontractors are also vulnerable to the knock-on effects on their capital and cash flow of a contractor’s insolvency, where many of the unsecured creditors will be subcontractors. Although exit rates are not the same as insolvencies, the ABS data is good evidence of a much higher rate of insolvencies in the micro and small businesses that are the great majority of construction firms. This is an important piece of context that should be taken into account when considering insolvencies. 

 

Saturday, 31 August 2024

Construction Robots Onsite in 2024

 Some examples of robots now in use




Over the last decade there it has been suggested many times that robots will take over construction sites, but today they are conspicuous by their absence. So how much progress has been made in actually getting robots onsite in construction?


The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) defines a robot as ‘a programmed actuated mechanism with a degree of autonomy to perform locomotion, manipulation or positioning.’ There are separate definitions of industrial robots and service robots, with construction and agriculture robots classified as service robots because they are mobile. Not regarded as robots are software, remote-controlled drones, voice assistants, and autonomous vehicles. The International Federation of Robotics estimates there were 3.9 million installed industrial robots in 2023.


For the purposes of this post the ISO definition is followed, where a robot is an autonomous or semi-autonomous mobile machine that undertakes or assists with a specific task that can be found working onsite. Excluded are exoskeletons, software systems and platforms, offsite manufacturing, remote controlled equipment and drones, autonomous excavators and graders, and 3D concrete printing.


Included are 17 robots, three for bricklaying, five for layout printing and surveying, four for reality capture and site monitoring, and one for each of drywall finishing, anchor hole drilling, rebar fixing, underfloor insulation, and solar farm construction.


Also, by restricting this review to onsite robotic equipment currently in use startups are not included. There are many of these around the world and some have reached demonstration stage with their technology. However, getting a robot from the research and development stage to onsite use is a difficult path and few startups have so far been successful, and often has required partnering with a larger, more established firm.


There is one technology in particular where there is rapid development that will be important to future construction, and may be a transformational technology, that is not included here. These are the humanoid robots being developed by Boston Dynamics, Agility Robotics, Figure AI, UBTECH Robotics, Engineered Arts, Hanson Robotics, Sanctuary AI, PAL Robotics, SuperDroid and SoftBank Robotics. The Tesla Optimus robot is due in 2025 for Tesla factories and 2026 for sale. The Amazon Digit warehouse robot has been developed by Agility Robotics and is also due to be trialled in 2025. 


Bricklaying


Figure 1. Bricklaying robots


FBR

The Hadrian X is a truck mounted arm that builds walls while leaving window and door openings. It uses custom blocks about twice the size of a standard brick with glue applied to the bottom when placed. Developed in Australia, 10 projects have been completed in WA, and it has just been approved for site use in the US.


Monumental

Monumental’s robot bricklayer places bricks and mortar, operated by Atrium, an AI- software. Developed in the Netherlands, Monumental completed a 15-metre facade in 2023, has since done a social housing project, and now has partnerships with 25 general contractors.


Construction Robotics

From New York company Construction Robotics, the MULE (Material Unit Lift Enhancer) comes in two versions. It is lift-assist equipment designed to handle and place heavy material on construction sites, using a 3 metre arm attached to a stand. The MULE robot lifts and places bricks and blocks for a bricklayer as they lay courses. There are several case studies on their website, and it was used in Australia on the Sydney Metro project.


Drywall/Plasterboard Finishing


Canvas

The San Francisco company’s drywall finishing robots capture 99.9% of the dust produced by sanding, applies a layer of joint compound over wet tape, and comes in two models that telescope to 12 or 15.5 feet (3.7 and 4.6 meters). It can produce a paint ready surface in two days, one for applying mud and one for sanding, with Level 4 targeted spray and Level 5 finishes. Canvas uses the Formant platform for data collection, analysis, and robot management, and has over-the-air software updates. Canvas has a strategic partnership with Hilti.


Figure 2. Drywall and anchor hole drilling robots



Anchor Holes


Jaibot

Liechtenstein based company Hilti launched the Jaibot in 2020. A semi-autonomous, BIM-enabled, mobile robot it drills anchor holes for mechanical, electrical and plumbing services and has been used on projects around the world by major contractors like Skanska, Bouygues, De Groot etc.  Norwegian company nLink started developing the Drilly robot in 2013 before partnering with Hilti in 2017 to commercialise the technology as Jaibot.


Line Printers


SitePrint

The HP SitePrint robot is an autonomous machine that prints construction layouts from CAD files using different inks for different types of layouts. Wireless links the 2D CAD file to the robotic systems that set the control points on the site. SitePrint works with base stations from: Leica ICON Total Robotic Stations; Topcon Layout navigator; and Trimble RTS573. Used in Australia by Aptelia, who also have the TinySurveyorPlotter from Monsen Engineering, designed for road works and other hard surfaces.


Figure 3. Line printing and layout robots


 Dusty Robotics

Their FieldPrinter automates layouts and is integrated with Autodesk Revitt and autoCAD. Their customer stories page has 15 projects.  Example: On a hospital expansion project in Chicago by RG Construction, FieldPrinter was used to print the layout for the framing, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and HVAC, with an estimated $300k in savings.


Civ Robotics

The San Francisco company backed by AlleyCorp has been used on over 100 US solar farms. It has two robots for coordinate collection and construction layouts. CivDot is an all-terrain 4 wheel drive rover that links to Trimble, Leica, Topcon and NTRIP base stations. It marks a point with paint but also has a speaker if a person is adding a physical marker like a flag or stake. The CivDash is for hard surfaces like roads and car parks. Example: Bechtel got a 6 times increase in coordinate collection for solar projects as CivDot gathered 125 points per hour while 2-person crews captured 20 per hour.


Tyker

German robot Tyker Plotter is a compact autonomous robot for marking lines on roads and asphalt using local sensors or a Total Station.


Surveying and Monitoring


Figure 4. Surveying and site monitoring robots


Nextera

Founded by MIT in the US, the Nextera DIDGE robot does site inspections and progress monitoring. Available as a tracked or wheeled robot it scans and documents a project. An AI powered system uses a variety of sensors to capture and compare wall, ceiling, mechanical, electrical and plumbing work to a BIM model.


DroneDeploy

The US company has AI driven ‘reality capture’ technology using a dock for aerial or ground robots that schedules inspections. The aerial DroneDeploy Flight App works on commercial drones and provides site mapping, facade and roof inspections. The aerial data can be combined with interior and exterior data from DroneDeploy Ground, which uses handheld 360 degree cameras, smart phones or Boston Dynamics Spotrobots that walk the site to collect data. Contractors like Turner Construction,Leighton Asia, and in Australia Hansen Yuncken have used these.


Onsite Technology is a Californian company that automates inspection and records the barcodes and location of panels in a solar farm using a rover with high resolution cameras. The geolocated data is uploaded to DroneDeploy to create a map of the panels and record their condition.


The Spot robot is also available with Trimble reality capture sensors. It can run autonomously once a site has been mapped. Used by contractors like Suffolk, Strabag, Virginia Tech etc.


Figure 5. SuperDroid robots


SuperDroid

US company SuperDroid has over a dozen robots designed for tasks such as site, pipe and crawl space inspection and materials handling. Capable of autonomous navigation after being driven once to create a map and path to follow. Used by Arup, Trimble, Balfour Beaty, DPR, Caterpillar, Gilbane, Black & Veatch etc. Superdroid have a quadruped robot called Cat that is like the Spot robot, and is developing a telepresence humanoid robot called Rocky for difficult or remote construction sites.


Rebar Fixing


Advanced Construction Robotics

The Pittsburgh company’s TyBOT is a rebar tying robot that self-navigates, self-ties, and does not require programming or a BIM plan. TyBOT’s partner, IronBOT, lifts, carries and places up to 5,000LB (2,268 kilos) an hour of rebar, from 9 to 60 foot bars (2.7 to 18.2 meters). ACR claims these robots can be set up and working onsite in a few hours. They have 2 dozen bridge and road projects on their website. Example: Over five months, D.T. Read completed the I-30 Arkansas Bridge using three TyBOT units that did 669,142 ties with a 30 percent schedule reduction.


Figure 6. Rebar fixing robots


Foam Insulation Spray


Q-bot

UK company Q-Bot robots can be controlled manually or operate autonomously to apply spray foam insulation to the underside of a suspended floor. Their 3D surveying platform has sensors to create point clouds that can be converted into simplified 3D models like Autodesk Revit and stored in AWS. Q-bot has seven UK and two French partners that use their robot.


Solar Installation


AES Maximo

AES Corporation is an American energy generation company, and they developed the Maximo robot for solar farm construction. It can install solar panels twice as fast as humans for half the cost. AES has installed 10 megawatts so far and plans to use Maximo to install five gigawatts over the next three years. Also used by Amazon constructing their largest solar farm at Bellefield.


Figure 7. Solar panel installation and underfloor insulation robots


Conclusion


Seventeen construction robots currently found onsite have been reviewed, however this is not intended to be comprehensive and no doubt there are others not included here. The ISO definition of a robot has been followed, which excludes exoskeletons, software, offsite manufacturing, remote controlled drones, autonomous excavators and graders, and onsite 3D concrete printing. Also excluded are startups with robotic equipment that is not yet being used onsite, and all the humanoid robots that are under development.


The degree of autonomy varies widely between these machines, but they have in common the ability to work without a human operator controlling their actions. Although remote controlled machines are becoming more common, like the Brokk or Husquavarna demolition machines, aerial drones like Skycatch or Voliro and tracked or wheeled rovers from Rugged Robotics or Acuity, the number of machines that can operate autonomously or semi-autonomously is still small. That said, many of these machines require humans to provide materials, like bricks for FBR’s Hadrian X, panels for Maximo and paint cans for line printers.


There are two broad categories of successful construction robots. The first is onsite data capture and use. This includes line printing, surveying, mapping, reality capture and inspection robots. These all have various combinations of sensors that allow autonomous site navigation, and range from relatively simple machines like line printers operating with a Total Station to complex combinations of technologies like Spot robots with site monitoring and mapping systems attached.


The second are repetitive tasks that have been automated successfully so robots can undertake them. These include bricklaying, drywall finishing, drilling, rebar tying, underfloor insulation and solar panel installing. The anchor hole drilling Jaibot has been available since 2020 and has been used on many sites around the world, making it arguably the most successful construction robot to date.


The important point is that these robots are now onsite. Although they may not yet be widely used, the fact that they are in use shows the construction industry is finding ways to develop and adopt them, despite the industry’s characteristics and structure, and the challenges and barriers faced by any major new technology. Further, the robots reviewed here are the first wave, leading the way for the wide range of robots and autonomous equipment that both established firms and startups are developing for the industry. In the near future more robots will be seen on construction sites, as many of the industry’s tasks become a working partnership between people and intelligent machines.