Here again we can witness the shift from local to regional to international transport companies, and a corresponding shift from small to medium to large-sized fleets. Fifty years ago, a large trucking fleet would have boasted between 30 - 50 vehicles. Today, a fleet of that size is a relatively diminutive one.

The drivers behind this shift are much the same as those that have caused the development of global truck manufacturing operations. Size begets scale, and scale begets savings. Unit operational costs for a single truck within a 100-strong fleet are correspondingly smaller than those that would be witnessed in a fleet of ten vehicles. Hence the drive towards consolidation, in which the small, local transport operations of three decades ago are now subsumed into larger, national and, increasingly, transnational fleets.

Whilst this trend may be observed within many industry sectors - the pursuit of savings through scale is a fundamental if not always successful business aim after all - the impact that it has had upon the truck supply industry is already marked, and, moving forwards, could prove to be yet greater.

On the one hand, we have witnessed a considerable degree of consolidation within the supply side of the Commercial vehicle industry. On the other, new entrants to the established markets - North America, Europe and Japan have been notable by their absence.

Whilst the world's three largest +16 tonne Commercial Vehicle producers - Daimler, AB Volvo and Paccar - are all based within emerged markets, the next three - China National, First Auto Works and Dongfeng are all Chinese companies. Indeed, analyse the top twenty vehicle producers within this segment, and there is a perfectly symmetrical split between the emerged and the emerging markets.

Essentially, whilst we have shifted towards a market in which some Commercial Vehicle manufacturers can claim to have a global footprint, the fact remains that, as yet, such worldwide pretensions are not backed up by sales figures.  Those OEMs based within the emerged markets - the so-called Triad that consists of Europe, North America and Japan - still derive by far the greatest percentage of their revenues from their home territories, and the same may be said of those OEMs which are based within the emerging markets.

Both groups are possessed of the same aim; namely to expand revenues through expanding sales by expanding market coverage. Hence the headlong rush on the part of the EU-based OEMs to establish operations in both China and India, the two markets that are seen, alongside Russia and Brazil, as offering the greatest growth potential moving forwards.

But what of the return traffic? Although Chinese OEMs are now beginning to play a significant role within the Russian truck market, and their Indian counterparts have made some notable strategic moves within the European Union - the acquisition of Czech OEM Avia by Ashok Leyland in 2006 being amongst the most significant - there has as yet been no significant attempt on the part of the emerging markets-based OEMs to enter the European market.

Barriers to entry for any company wishing to compete in a new Commercial Vehicle market are high. This is not so much a function of getting new vehicles to market - an exercise in relatively simple logistics - but in supporting them once they are there. Depth of aftermarket support coverage - or the perception of the same - has traditionally been a key driver in terms of the Commercial Vehicle brand chosen by a truck operator; if support is seen to be patchy, then irrespective of the perceived merits of the actual product, the sale will probably go elsewhere. Network support has been and still remains a key determinant of truck sales. However, changes within the end users' business models looks set to render the intrinsic value of the suppliers' infrastructure as less rather than more important as we move forward.

There are two reasons for this. On the one hand, the trend towards consolidation witnessed within the truck fleets has had the effect of developing a parallel infrastructure. At present, a large percentage of trucks now sold within Europe return to their supplying dealerships for service and maintenance, but we can now see the potential for this outsourcing on the part of the end user to be taken back in house. It makes very little commercial sense for an operation numbering ten vehicles to maintain its own vehicles. When that number rises to a hundred or a thousand, the economics shift. Ultimately, there seems to be good reason to believe that the larger truck fleets will maintain not just their own vehicles, but may also offer a service that competes with their suppliers for third party users. The outlook for the traditional dealer-based business model begins to look very patchy at this point.

On the other hand, we have to revisit some very basic task analysis. Road transport today - in 2008 - is a very different creature from road transport in 1978. Today, the task of moving goods between two points is a part of the overall supply chain process, and, more crucially, one that is recognised as being thus. A truck is now a mere component in the overall process of getting products from supply to demand, and, as such, the transport process has become increasingly commoditized.

This is, we feel, the key determinant in the argument for a diminution of brand. What were transport companies three decades ago are now logistics providers. Whereas the former were small operations, riven through with traditional views about product sourcing, their descendants adopt a far more hard-nosed approach to business management. Transport is a low margin business - showing a typical return of well below seven per cent - and so cost control is everything. A modern vehicle fleet manager will rely as much upon a spreadsheet as s/he will a set of spanners, and the vehicle that returns the least costs will be the vehicle that attains the greatest popularity. Saving a fraction of a kilometre per litre in terms of fuel consumption can, when spread over a medium to large vehicle fleet, have a huge - six figure - impact upon the bottom line.

We see this as the route to the European market for the non-indigenous OEMs. As logistics continues to supplant transport, then so the latter becomes increasingly commoditized, and so the value of brand is further decreased. As brand diminishes, and as the need for a manufacturer-provided infrastructure also fades, then so the competitive landscape becomes one that is far more level, and, at its centre lies a single issue; that of cost.

The costs incurred by a single vehicle are dependant upon so many variables that attempting to draw comparisons across either user fleets or supplying marques is a fool's errand. What works well for one company will be totally inappropriate for another. As such, operational experience is, today, the key determinant behind truck acquisition choice.

But a single decision could alter this mindset completely. Many vehicles are already sold on the basis of guaranteed uptime. Should an OEM enter the market with some means of underwriting cost, it would get a hearing. There seems to be no reason why this OEM should be one with its roots away from the Triad.

We make this argument for the simple reason that manufacturing location is no longer an issue in most procurement decisions. It may defy existing geographical logic that Wal-Mart sources over $18 billion worth of products from China on an annual basis, but, given the eponymous US retailing giant's continued success, it would be a brave analyst who would argue with its actions from the perspective of pure economics. If it works for Wal-Mart, why should it not work for trucks? A Chinese or an Indian-sourced truck with a guaranteed cost ceiling would be an eminently palatable proposition for any logistics operation.

This is a view of a future, and one that may be some way away. However, we see the European truck market - and, by extension - the entire Triad market - as being receptive to one more cohort shift. Today's global logistics industry is populated one the demand side by global companies providing a commodity product. That the supply side should follow suit would seem to be an inescapable conclusion.