2003 annual report and can shipments report annual report and can shipments report can manufacturers...

2003 Annual Report and Can Shipments Report

Can Manufacturers Institute

Top Right: Jeff DeLiberty, Silgan Containers Corporation,

and Sean Reilly, Can Manufacturers Institute.

Center: Frank Mechura, 2002-2004 CMI Chairman, Crown

Cork & Seal Company (USA), Inc., and Leon Midgett, Ball

Corporation.

Center Right: Frank Mechura, 2002-2004 CMI Chairman,

Crown Cork & Seal Company (USA), Inc., addresses the

membership at the 2003 CMI Annual Meeting breakfast.

Center Left: Lars Emilson, Rexam Beverage Can Americas,

and Bill Mansfield, The Valspar Corporation.

Bottom Left: Tom Hale, Ball Corporation, addresses the

membership at the General Session of the CMI Annual Meeting.

2003 Annual Report & Can Shipments Report

Table of Contents1-12

1

2

3-4

4

5-9

8

10

11-12

13-1913

14

14

14

14

15

16

17

18

18

19

19

19

19

19

2003 Annual ReportCMI Missions and Goals

Letter from the President

Government Relations

Deposit Bill Highlights

Food Can Marketing Committee

Food Can Business-to-Business Promotion Program

Market Data Committee

Beverage Can Public Relations Committee/Aluminum Can Council

Can Shipments ReportSubscription Information

About This Report

CMI Market Data Committee

Acknowledgments

Participants

Definitions

Metal Can Shipments: 2001-2003

Food Can Shipments: 1998-2003

Metal Can Shipments by Material/Technology: 2003

General Line Can Shipments: 1999-2003

Beverage Can Shipments by Size: 2003

Aluminum Can Shipments, Exports: 2002-2003

Aluminum Can Shipments, Imports: 2002-2003

Steel Can Shipments, Exports: 2002-2003

Steel Can Shipments, Imports: 2002-2003

l 2003 Annual Report

The Can Manufacturers Institute’s mission is to represent its members’ interests before state and federal

legislative and regulatory bodies. Additionally, CMI provides members with market development programs

within the parameters of anti-trust law. To fulfill this task, in 2003, CMI maintained and strengthened its

commitment to the following CMI goals:

To provide the industry with effective representation in Congressional and Administrative policy-making on

those issues with specific impact on or important to the overall success of the can making industry.

To collect and disseminate industry statistics to provide an accurate assessment of the industry’s production

and to collect and analyze consumer market information to promote the growth and economic welfare of

CMI’s members.

To promote the industry with trade, local and national media and within state and local governments by

publicizing overall can benefits and industry achievements.

To serve, on an as-needed basis, as a facilitation resource for the discussion and resolution of joint industry

technical, operational or regulatory challenges.

CMI’s dedication to these goals is evident in all that has been accomplished this year. This Annual Report

provides a summary of the past year’s accomplishments, as well as a look at our strategy to fulfill these goals

in the coming year.

CMI Missions and Goals

•

•

•

•

2003 Annual Report l PAGE 2

The old Washington, DC adage “there are no permanent friends or enemies, just permanent interests” has proven

true in the past four years. A nation polarized by ideology, we were split on national security issues, and then

fiercely united in fighting terrorism. Now, as the presidential election draws near, we again are a country divided.

The vagaries of national politics often are mirrored in the corporate world, particularly from the trade association

perspective. Rivals become allies, and friends are at times adversaries. This past year, however, CMI recognized

the many challenges facing can makers and forged strong alliances with customer and supplier groups to protect

and to grow the industry.

Today, our partnerships and alliances are many and varied. The Aluminum Can Council continues to work to

grow beverage can sales and promote recycling. The CMI’s participation in the Canned Food Alliance is now

in its seventh year and great strides have been made in creating greater consumer acceptability for canned foods.

For the first time, can makers, along with steel and aluminum suppliers are funding a food can business-to-

business communications program. Our close relationship with the Beer Institute continues and a new endeavor

with The National Soft Drink Association joins can makers with CSD customers to advertise the importance

of recycling. We are also aligned in our regulatory and legislative work with the chemical, automobile, steel,

food, and paper industries.

These alliances bring CMI’s member companies many benefits. In addition to sharing the cost burden of many

vital industry programs, they allow for increased communication to address jointly issues of concern. They

create a united front when promoting our industry, and offer an atmosphere of comity when facing common

concerns. In these challenging times, our industry partnerships are invaluable in CMI’s efforts to address the

many interests of the can making industry.

Best Regards,

Robert R. BudwayPresident

Letter from the President

DelistingThe Regulatory Committee continued to seek an

exemption for the two-piece beverage can making

subcategory from the Metal Can MACT via formal

delisting. The Committee and EPA are working to

resolve the remaining technical delisting issues needed

for this subcategory, including revision of EPA’s

formaldehyde risk assessment. If successful, this

exemption will prevent the need for costly and

unwarranted pollution controls. The Committee is

encouraging EPA to propose this delisting by the end

of 2004.

MACTIn November 2003, EPA published the final National

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

(NESHAP or MACT) for the Surface Coating of Metal

Can operations in the United States. The complex

rule applies to approximately 140 existing facilities

and is expected to reduce hazardous air pollutants

(HAPs) by 70 percent from current metal can coating

operations. The final negotiated requirements will

save CMI members potentially 25-50% of the cost

of originally drafted compliance costs. Industry

compliance is required by November 2006, three years

after final promulgation of the Can MACT, unless an

extension is granted due to pending delisting petitions.

The Regulatory Committee and Health and Safety Subcommittee continued to work with the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Occupational

Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to advance the interests of the can making industry.

Government Relations

PAGE 3 l 2003 Annual Report

FDA Bioterrorism RegulationsCMI, along with other packaging groups, successfully

lobbied the Congress and administrative agencies

to exempt can makers from potentially onerous bio-

terrorism security requirements. In February 2003,

the FDA proposed new registration, recordkeeping

and prior import notification requirements for food

and food packaging facilities to comply with mandates

from Congress under the Bioterrorism Preparedness

and Response Act of 2002. Industry was concerned

about the significant costs and burdens that FDA’s

proposed rules would impose on the industries without

increasing the security of our nation’s food supply.

In October, the FDA released “interim final” bio-

terrorism regulations which now exclude can makers

from requirements.

OSHA Metalworking FluidsThe Health and Safety Subcommittee remains con-

cerned that OSHA may regulate industrial metalworking

fluids (MWF) in the workplace. An OSHA standard

would address union concerns that workers need

better protection from potential health risks due

to MWF workplace exposure. Implementation of

suggested OSHA metalworking fluids requirements

may result in costly additional engineering controls

and administrative changes for facilities that fail to

meet the revised exposure limitations. In October

2003, two labor unions filed suit against the U.S.

Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA) in the U.S. Court of Appeals,

3rd Circuit, to force agency action in promulgating a

stringent health standard to regulate worker exposure

to MWFs. In December, CMI worked with the National

Association of Manufacturers and the Chamber of

Commerce to file a joint amicus brief with the court

supporting OSHA’s decision not to regulate MWFs.

On March 22, 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

3rd Circuit denied the unions’ request to regulate

MWFs. The Court indicated that it was sympathetic

to the union pleas that exposing workers to MWFs

may cause adverse health effects, but determined that

OSHA was justified in focusing agency resources on

other substances.

Deposit Bill HighlightsIn 2003, deposit and related packaging and recycling measures

were introduced at near record levels nationwide. The Legislative

Committee was active in California, Hawaii and Maine where

state legislators continue to seek to expand their mandatory

container deposit laws. In each instance, the Legislative

Committee was able to advance the interests of the can industry

in the deposit bill debate. In California, the Committee was

successful in obtaining flexible new labeling options and deferring

the compliance date for labeling to July 2004, thus allowing

current plant inventories of California can ends to be exhausted.

In Hawaii, state representatives tentatively have agreed to CMI

recommendations regarding source reduction and labeling

issues. In Maine, the Committee successfully defeated a container

labeling bill calling for the colorization of typeface on beverage

container ends.

In addition, the “National Beverage Container Producer

Responsibility Act of 2003” was reintroduced by Senator Jim

Jeffords (I-VT) in November 2003 but is not expected to move

out of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public

Works. The bill requires beverage producers to attain an 80-

percent recycling rate and includes a 10-cent per container deposit.


In 2003, the Canned Food Alliance (CFA), a partner-

ship of the American Iron and Steel Institute’s Steel

Packaging Council, select food processors, and CMI

food can manufacturing members, continued to

increase consumer awareness of the benefits of canned

food and successfully changed perceptions about the

nutritional value of canned food. The CFA campaign

entered into a number of new valuable partnerships

which culminated in new media campaigns and

outreach programs, and continued to build on its

previous successes as well.

New CFA partnerships in 2003 include the launch of

a two-year working relationship with Chef Jacques

Pepin. The CFA and Chef Pepin conducted a media

tour that generated 514 television placements in the

past year. In 2004, Chef Pepin will launch his “Quick

Cuisine” show on PBS and the CFA will seek to

capitalize on this additional exposure. In addition, in

2003, CFA entered into a partnership with Bob Greene,

Oprah Winfrey’s fitness trainer. CFA conducted a

media tour with Greene that generated more than

23 million media impressions including the “Today”

show, “Good Day New York” and MSNBC.

In addition to these new partnerships, CFA continued

its partnership with dietician Roberta Duyff in 2003.

Duyff attended numerous meetings of the American

Dietetic Association and spoke to more than 1,000

registered dieticians. These presentations are instru-

mental in educating dieticians about the benefits and

nutritional value of canned food.

Finally, CFA launched its redesigned website —

www.mealtime.org—in the past year. The new website

includes an enhanced recipe database and is designed

to be more user friendly. The site attracted 886,230

visitors in 2003 and 28,920 CANnection subscribers.

These numbers exceeded CFA’s visitor goals and

introduced hundreds of thousands of visitors to the

www.mealtime.org Recipe Database and the benefits

of cooking with canned foods. To continue this trend,

CFA intends to augment the recipe database and build

strategic customization for online visitors in 2004.

Food Can Marketing Committee

Jacques Pepin, Roberta Duyff, Andy Schloss and Melissa Murphy attend the Canned Food Alliance’s “An Afternoon to Savor with Jacques” luncheon at DANIEL in New York City.

This dish was prepared at the CFA luncheon where Chef Jacques Pepin shared some of his finest recipes featuring canned food.


Benchmark Results: NutritionCanned vs. Fresh 2005 Goal: 41.7% of primary grocery shoppers perceive canned food as “more

or equally” nutritious as fresh.

Benchmark Results: NutritionCanned vs. Frozen 2005 Goal: 57.3% of primary grocery shoppers perceive canned food as “more

or equally” nutritious as frozen.


When compared to its fresh counterparts, do you feel that canned food is more, less or equally nutritious

when prepared for the table?

40

38

36

34

32

301997 1998 2000 2001 2003

31.7

37.238 38

39

When compared to its frozen counterparts, do you feel that canned food is more, less or equally nutritious

when prepared for the table?

58

54

50

46

42

38

34

301997 1998 2000 2001 2003

54 53.555.9 56.6

54

Today’s high-tech can is the ultimate innovation for busy lifestyles. Now with easy-open endsfor maximum convenience, it’s the packaging solution of choice for the modern consumer. Plus, it’s shelf-stable so you can stock up without worrying about spoilage and multiple tripsto the supermarket. Unlike pouched and plastic packaging, cans are the most tamper and punctureresistant, which is critical in today’s society. And when it comes to your return on investment,no packaging technology compares to the low-cost design and efficiency of the can.So rediscover the can. Because modern packaging doesn’t get any more advanced.

www.cancentral.com


Food Can Business-to-Business Promotion Program In 2003, CMI executed a business-to-business marketing program to convey the positive qualities of the metal

food can, as well as to stem the growth of alternative, non-metal packaging materials that could replace metal

food cans. Before the program launch, qualitative research indicated that packaging decisions are made within

a “buying committee” in most companies, with the primary individuals driving packaging choices being brand

managers, packaging engineers and research & development professionals. Based on these findings, a business-

to-business program was developed and executed. It focused on trade media advertising in publications read

by the target audience. Advertisements were published in BrandPackaging, Food & Drug Packaging, Packaging

Digest, and Food Processing. In addition, members of the CMI Food Can Marketing Committee gave a

presentation titled “Food Can Innovations and Trends” at the recent Pack Expo in Las Vegas, Nevada. The CMI

business-to-business seminar was the second highest attended session at Pack Expo. The presentation generated

lots of good press, including a front page feature story in the Pack Expo Show Daily that was distributed to all

show attendees (see below).

In 2004, the CMI Business-to-Business program will focus on PR and media in an effort to generate positive

coverage concerning metal food cans. The Food Can Marketing Committee will conduct market research to

gain a better understanding of the target audience and its drivers; implement a targeted media campaign to

generate positive media coverage of today’s metal food can and establish a point of differentiation between metal

food cans and alternative packaging materials among the trade and business community; and develop an

influencer outreach program to educate industry opinion leaders about metal packaging advances and innovations.


Today’s high-tech can is the ultimate innovation for getting meals on the table fast.It’s shelf-stable, so families can stock up without worrying about spoilage and multiple trips to the supermarket. The can’s new easy-open ends are more convenient than ever.Unlike pouched and plastic packaging, cans are the most tamper and puncture resistant, which is critical in today’s society. And when it comes to your return on investment,no packaging technology compares to the low-cost design and efficiency of the can.So rediscover the can. Because modern packaging doesn’t get any more advanced.

www.cancentral.com


In 2003, the CMI Market Data Committee continued

its mission of providing statistical collection and

market analysis services for the industry, while at the

same time updating and improving existing services.

Beginning with the January 2003 CMI Beverage Can

Shipments Report, the Market Data Committee was

able to provide year-over-year comparisons of ship-

ments of cans intended for non-carbonated beverages

broken out by categories. In addition, the Market

Data Committee continued to evaluate and adjust the

CMI Metal Can Shipments Report to ensure that it

accurately reflects the size of the market for food and

general line cans. The Market Data Committee will

continue to adjust estimated shipment data for non-

reporters to reflect events in the industry.

The Market Data Committee continued to receive

quarterly soft drink retail scan data from Information

Resources Inc. (IRI) in 2003. The Market Data

Committee believes that the IRI data is a useful tool

to gauge sales of canned soft drinks compared to PET

and glass containers. The data also allows CMI

members to observe trends in consumer preferences

for particular packaging configurations and serving

sizes in the carbonated soft drink market.

Over the past year, the Market Data Committee up-

dated the CMI website to ensure its usefulness for

the CMI membership. The Committee has made

recycling more of a focus on the site, including fun

facts and current figures. The website also provides

up-to-date information on issues relating to the can

industry, current activities of CMI committees and

current copies of CMI statistical reports and publications.

Lastly, in 2003, the Market Data Committee released

an updated version of the CMI Membership

Directory. The CMI Directory is intended to inform

customers and consumers about the types of cans

CMI member companies manufacture and the

products CMI supplier companies provide. The

Market Data Committee will continue to evaluate

and update the CMI Directory when necessary.

In 2004, the Market Data Committee will continue to

provide the CMI membership with information to

assist them in their current and future business goals.

Market Data Committee

IRI 4th Quarter 2003

Food StoresPackage Mix Share by Unit (2003)


Drug StoresPackage Mix Share by Unit (2003)


Food, Drug & Mass Merchandise Stores Combined Package Mix

Share by Unit ( 2003)

Food, Drug, Mass Merchandise & Convenience Stores Combined Package Mix Share by Unit (2003)



Cans Plastic Glass

16.0% (+0.2)

1.0% (0.0)

83.0% (-0.2)

Cans Plastic Glass

15.8% (0.0)

0.2% (0.0)

84.0% (0.0)

Cans Plastic Glass

15.8% (+0.2)

0.9% (0.0)

83.3% (-0.2)

22.4% (+0.2)

1.1% (-0.1)

76.5% (-0.1)

Cans Plastic Glass

Beverage Can Public Relations Committee/Aluminum Can Council

The Aluminum Can Council (a joint effort of the CMI

Beverage Can Public Relations Committee and the

Aluminum Association Can Committee) implemented

several programs in 2003 to increase the sale of

aluminum beverage cans and to promote the recycling

of cans. The campaigns included an innovative ad-

vertising program to increase sales, a test partnership

with municipalities to increase can recycling and

an inter-industry promotion to communicate the

importance of recycling aluminum beverage cans.

The ACC advertising campaign launched in May 2003

in 12 cities and used radio ads and in-store promotions

to tout the benefits of the beverage can. The campaign

ran from May until the end of October. To assess its

success, Opinion Research Corporation, Inc. conducted

pre-and post-campaign Attitude & Usage surveys

among consumers in the target markets and analyzed

A.C. Nielsen data to determine the campaign’s impact

on can sales. The A&U surveys demonstrated that the

ads were noticed and remembered, and the Nielsen

data showed a 3 percent increase in sales year over year,

versus a 1 percent decrease in the control markets. The

four percent positive difference indicates that the radio

ads had a marked impact on the sale of aluminum cans.

The ACC believes the advertising efforts of the ACC

and the Aluminum Association in years past have had

a significant and measurable impact. Currently, new

ads and other promotional concepts are being devel-

oped for consideration in 2004. Additionally, the ACC

will explore new opportunities in growth markets.

Aluminum Can Recycling Promotion ProgramsFaced with stagnating aluminum can recycling rates,

the ACC also implemented several programs to in-

crease consumer awareness of and participation in

aluminum can recycling. The Curbside Community

Aluminum Awareness Campaign is the primary

undertaking of the ACC to directly impact recycling

rates. The program’s strategy is to promote the value

of cans in the waste stream and the importance of

recycling cans to help fund curbside programs. The


program was designed to have municipalities assist

in its funding, as they would benefit from the increase

in aluminum cans collected. However, when seeking

municipalities with which to partner, few had the

funds to help finance a program. There was interest,

however, in experimenting with various curbside

options to determine “best practices” for municipalities

to consider. These various options are currently being

tested. The end result, it is hoped, is a “best practices”

guide that will assist municipalities in their efforts to

increase aluminum can collection.

A second program to promote recycling was an in-

plant campaign at both aluminum sheet and can

manufacturing facilities. The campaign reinforced

the industry’s message of the importance of recycling

and encouraged employees to carry the can recycling

message back to their communities through a can

recycling drive. Organized around America Recycles

Day in November, the ACC provided promotional

material and logistical support to participating facil-

ities. Anheuser-Busch Recycling arranged collection

trailers at the facilities. Some 63 facilities in 27 states

participated reaching almost 16,000 employees. They

raised more than $50,000 for charity through their

recycling efforts.

CMI’s educational program, Aluminum Beverage

Cans: The ABCs of Environmental Education, was

expanded in 2003, by contracting with the Keystone

Center to update the curriculum geared to primary

schools and to develop a new program targeted for

middle school kids. These have been completed and

marketed to teachers at the National Science Teachers

Association conference in April 2004.


Can Shipments Report

Subscription Information

Intended for survey participants and members of the Can Manufacturers Institute,

monthly Can Shipments Reports are mailed approximately 45 days after the end of

each month. Quarterly reports are available on a subscription basis to government,

public and private organizations, and individuals upon request.

Subscription Rates$265.00 per year for domestic annual subscriptions; $79.50 for a single annual report.

Rates include taxes, postage and handling costs and pre-payment is required.

Mail Subscriptions to: Can Manufacturers Institute

1730 Rhode Island Avenue, NW

Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20036

About This ReportThe Can Shipments Report is compiled directly from reports received from can manufacturers unless otherwise

noted. This statistical program is sponsored by the Can Manufacturers Institute and is under the direction of

the CMI Market Data Committee.

CMI Market Data CommitteeAstrid Belt

Neill Mitchell

Tom Slauter (Committee Co-Chairman)

Jo Stephens

Jeff DeLiberty (Committee Co-Chairman)

Sean Reilly

AcknowledgmentsThe Can Manufacturers Institute gratefully acknowledges the cooperation of all industry participants, especially

the assistance of the CMI Market Data Committee for their efforts in the compilation of this annual report.

Participants*Allstate Can Corporation

Ball Corporation

Ball Western Can Company, L.L.C.

Bertels Can Company

BWAY Corporation

Crown Cork & Seal Company (USA), Inc.

Metal Container Corporation

Rexam Beverage Can Americas

Silgan Containers Corporation

U.S. Can Corporation

Van Can Company

Participants in the CMI Shipments Reports manufacture over 95% of the metal cans in the United States.

In order to represent the entire domestic can industry, CMI does estimate can shipments for non-reporters

in its reports.

Ball Corporation

Crown Cork & Seal Company (USA), Inc.

Metal Container Corporation

Rexam Beverage Can Americas

Silgan Containers Corporation

CMI

*

2003 Can Shipments Report l PAGE 14

General DefinitionsA metal can is a single-walled container constructed

wholly of tinplate, blackplate (including tin-free steel),

waste plate, aluminum sheet or impact extrusions,

designed for packaging products. It excludes steel pails

defined as single-walled shipping containers having

capacities of one to 12 gallons inclusive, that are

cylindrically constructed of steel of 29 gauge and heavier.

Shipments for use by the same company, an affiliate,

subsidiary, or parent company are considered as

shipments FOR OWN USE. All others are considered

shipments INVOICED FOR SALE.

Coverage of this report is confined to metal cans and

ends shipped for use on metal cans by metal can

manufacturers.

Product DefinitionsShipments: The actual number of unfilled can bodies

produced, invoiced for sale and shipped from a location

within the U.S. or U.S. controlled territory.

Exports: The actual number of unfilled can bodies

produced, invoiced for sale and shipped from a location

within the U.S. or U.S. controlled territory to a location

outside of the U.S. or U.S. controlled territory.

Beer: A two-piece aluminum or steel container con-

taining beer, non-alcoholic beer, wine/spirits, or wine/

spirit coolers.

Soft Drinks: A two-piece aluminum or steel beverage

container. Includes all carbonated and non-carbonated

soft drinks, iced tea, tonic, waters and juice beverages.

Baby Foods: Self Explanatory. Includes all milk or

soy-based baby formula and baby food products.

Dairy Products: Includes butter, cheese, eggs, milk,

milk-based products, ice cream, etc. Also includes non

milk-based puddings.

Fruit/Fruit Juices: Includes all conventional fruit items:

apples, apple sauce, peaches, pears, pineapple, etc.

Also includes fruit juices and all citrus items. Does

not include fruit juices in two-piece “soft drink” cans.

Meat & Poultry: Includes all conventional meat and

poultry items: ham, luncheon meat, potted meat,

vienna sausage. Also includes chili and meat stews.

Does not include soup and spaghetti with meat which

are in Other Foods (Including Soup).

Pet Foods: Includes cat, dog and fish food.

Seafoods: Includes fish and shell fish.

Vegetable/Vegetable Juices: Includes conventional

vegetable items: peas, green beans, corn, tomatoes,

etc. Also includes dry line items: baked beans, kidney

beans. Includes mushrooms and pickles. Does not

include soup which is in Other Foods (Including

Soup). Does not include juices in two-piece “soft

drink” cans.

Other Foods (Including Soup): Includes all food items

not otherwise enumerated. Includes soups, edible oils

and solid shortenings, spaghetti, spices, baking powder,

extracts, yeast, sandwich spreads, jams, mayonnaise,

snacks, cocoa, dough, flour, honey, nuts, popcorn,

popped corn, potato chips, pretzels, rice, noodles,

sauces, syrups, cake, candies, cereals, loose tea and

canned bags. Also includes drugs intended for human

consumption except milk-based drugs which are in

Dairy. Does not include iced tea which is in Soft Drinks.

Aerosol: This is the only category restricted by can

type. Includes food and nonfoods.

Other Nonfoods: Includes all other nonfood items

not otherwise enumerated. Includes adhesive strips,

alcohol, tennis balls, cements/dressings, chemicals,

cleaners, cosmetics, dentists’ supplies, disinfectants,

dyes, ether, wood fillers, games/toys, germicides,

gasoline, lubricating grease, grinding compounds,

insecticides, pencils, photographic supplies, plaster of

paris, floor/shoe/leather/other non-automotive

polishes, body/cleanser/talcum powders, roofing

cement, grass seed, shaving preparations, soaps,

solvents, stamp pads, tobacco and automotive products

such as motor oil, anti-freeze, brake fluid, gasoline,

radiator additives and automotive polish.

Definitions

PAGE 15 l 2003 Can Shipments Report

* To avoid disclosure of individual company data, this category has been omitted.

% ChangeMillions of Cans

-1.1%

-1.2%

0.3%

-14.5%

–

-0.7%

-1.5%

-0.4%

-2.5%

-1.4%

-8.1%

-10.3%

-6.0%

3.3%

2.2%

2.3%

-1.6%

-8.6%

0.3%

1.7%

-2.9%

–

–

134,594

*

27,701

4,360

*

2,785

0

99,747

31,720

68,027

30,486

810

470

2,184

1,957

1,958

1,215

10,590

4,732

6,570

4,361

3,135

1,226

*

*

Metal Can Shipments: 2001-2003135,801

*

25,519

4,232

*

5,300

0

100,750

32,736

68,014

30,819

489

433

2,295

2,037

1,798

1,509

8,685

5,579

7,994

4,232

2,969

1,263

*

*

136,103

*

28,025

4,346

*

3,256

0

100,477

32,211

68,266

31,281

821

512

2,436

2,081

1,894

1,189

10,350

4,810

7,188

4,345

3,083

1,262

*

*

Total Metal Cans Shipped

By Market

For Sale

Beverage

Food

General Packaging

For Own Use

Beverage

Food

General Packaging

By Product

Beverage

Beer

Soft Drinks

Food

Baby Foods

Coffee

Dairy Products

Fruit/Fruit Juices

Meat & Poultry

Seafoods

Veg./Veg. Juices

Other Foods (Incl. Soup)

Pet Foods

General Packaging

Aerosol

Other Nonfoods

By Material Used

Steel

Aluminum

20022001 2003 2002-03


Billions of Cans

Food Can Shipments: 1998-20032.0

1.751.5

1.251.0

0.750.5

0.250.0

0.471-8.1%

2.01.75

1.51.25

1.00.75

0.50.25

0.0

0.810-1.4%

3.02.75

2.52.25

2.01.75

1.51.25

1.0 20031.957-6.0%

4.03.53.02.52.01.5

10.50.0

2.185-10.3%

3.02.75

2.52.25

2.01.75

1.51.25

1.0

1.2152.2%

2.01.75

1.51.25

1.00.75

0.50.25

0.0

1.9583.3%

20034.732-1.6%

6.56.25

6.05.75

5.55.25

5.04.75

4.5

12.011.511.010.510.0

9.59.08.58.0

10.5912.3%

Baby Foods

0.793-30.7%

0.782-1.4%

0.585-25.2%

0.489-16.5%

0.82068.0%

Coffee

0.6203.7%

0.6322.0%

0.432-31.8%

0.4330.3%

0.51218.2%

20031998 1999 2000 2001 2002 20031998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Fruit / Fruit Juices

1998 19992.500-2.3%

2.303-7.9%

20002.098-8.9%

20012.037-2.9%

20022.0812.2%

Dairy Products

1998 19991.61626.4%

1.545-4.4%

20001.83819.0%

20012.29524.8%

20022.4366.1%

2003

SeafoodsMeat & Poultry

1998 19991.661-1.2%

1.8229.7%

20001.651-9.4%

20011.7988.9%

20021.8945.3%

2003 20031998 19991.685

-11.3%1.630-3.2%

20001.6310.0%

20011.509-7.5%

20021.189

-21.2%

Other Foods (Incl. Soup)Veg. / Veg. Juices

1998 19999.2232.7%

9.7786.1%

20009.545-2.4%

20018.685-9.0%

200210.35019.2%

2003 1998 19996.093-0.7%

5.755-5.5%

20005.566-3.3%

20015.5790.2%

20024.810

-13.8%


Millions of Cans

Total

Beverage

Beer

Soft Drinks

Food

Baby Foods

Coffee

Dairy Products

Fruit/Fruit Juices

Meat & Poultry

Seafoods

Veg./Veg. Juices

Other Foods (Incl. Soup)

Pet Foods

General Packaging

Aerosol

Other Nonfoods

** To avoid disclosure of individual company data, this category has been omitted.

Metal Can Shipments by Material/Technology: 2003

19,432

0

0

0

15,126

**

**

**

**

504

92

6,965

1,603

1,320

4,306

3,135

1,171

115,162

99,747

31,720

68,027

15,360

**

**

**

**

1,454

1,123

3,625

3,129

5,250

55

0

55

By Technology2-Piece 3-Piece

Billions of Cans

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.01.51.0

General Line Can Shipments: 1999-2003

Total Aerosol Other

134,594

99,747

31,720

68,027

30,486

810

470

2,184

1,957

1,958

1,215

10,590

4,732

6,570

4,361

3,135

1,226

Total Cans

**

99,747

31,720

68,027

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

0

0

0

**

0

0

0

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

4,361

3,135

1,226

By MaterialAluminumSteel

4.361 3.135 1.2264.406 3.066 1.340 4.356 3.002 1.354 4.232 2.969 1.263 4.346 3.083 1.263


20031999 2000 2001 2002

Millions of Cans

-15.4%

-31.6%

-3.7%

1,243.4

140.2

69.2

1,051.6

95.9

66.6

12 Ounce or Less

Over 12 Ounce & Less Than 1 Gallon

Over 1 Gallon

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission

Aluminum Can Shipments, Exports: 2002-2003

2002 2003 2002-2003% Change

Millions of Cans

17.4%

467.0%

-21.5%

600.7

10.2

259.3

705.3

57.7

203.5

12 Ounce or Less

Over 12 Ounce & Less Than 1 Gallon

Over 1 Gallon


Aluminum Can Shipments, Imports: 2002-2003

2002 2003 2002-2003% Change

Millions of Cans

-39.5%

6.6%

137.7

57.4

83.3

61.2

13.21 Gallons or Less (closed by crimping or soldering)

13.21 Gallons or Less (all other)


Steel Can Shipments, Exports: 2002-2003

2002 2003 2002-2003% Change

Millions of Cans

7.3%

10.6%

930.6

260.0

998.8

287.6

13.21 Gallons or Less (closed by crimping or soldering)

13.21 Gallons or Less (all other)


Steel Can Shipments, Imports: 2002-2003

2002 2003 2002-2003% Change

Millions of Cans

2,844.7

92,692.4

4,209.7

**

**

**

**

**

**

Less Than 12 Ounce

12 Ounce

Greater Than 12 Ounce

** To avoid disclosure of individual company data, this category has been omitted.

Beverage Can Shipments by Size: 2003

Beer Soft Drink Total


Top Left: Dave Hoover, Ball Corporation.

Top Center: Steve Bettcher, Alcan Aluminum Corporation,

Bill Brandell, Rexam Beverage Can Americas, and Bill Barker,

Rexam Beverage Can Americas.

Center: Allan Copestick, Metal Container Corporation, and

Joseph Sellinger, Metal Container Corporation.

Right: Allan Copestick, Metal Container Corporation, and Ray

Seabrook, Ball Corporation

Bottom Right: Dennis Cornish, Silgan Containers Corporation,

chats with Dave Eigner, Silgan Containers Corporation.

tel 202.232.4677 · fax 202.232.5756 · www.cancentral.com

CMI Member Companies 2004

Alcan Aluminum Corporation ALCOA, Inc.ARCO Aluminum Inc.Ball CorporationBWAY CorporationCrown Cork & Seal Company (USA), Inc.Darex Container Products, W.R. Grace & Co.ICI Packaging CoatingsINX International Ink CompanyInternational Steel Group Inc.Metal Container CorporationOrbis CorporationPPG Industries, Inc.Rexam Beverage Can AmericasSequa Can Machinery, Inc.Silgan Containers CorporationSonoco-Phoenix, Inc. The Valspar CorporationU.S. Can CorporationUSS-Posco IndustriesUSX CorporationVan Can CompanyWatson StandardWeirton Steel CorporationWise Alloys LLC

CMI Executive Committee

Ball CorporationR. David HooverJohn Friedery Ray Seabrook

Crown Cork & Seal Company (USA), Inc.John ConwayFrank MechuraAlan Rutherford

Metal Container CorporationJoseph SellingerTony Bhalla Allan Copestick

Rexam Beverage Can AmericasLars EmilsonWilliam BarkerBill Brandell

Silgan Containers CorporationJames BeamGary Hughes

Can Manufacturers InstituteRobert Budway

2003 annual report and can shipments report annual report and can shipments report can manufacturers...

Documents