🐣 The Gapuma Spring Lunch – A Q1 Tradition Every year, as Easter approaches, the Gapuma London team pauses – just briefly – to come together, take stock of the quarter behind us, and look ahead to what’s coming. This year, that felt more important than ever. Q1 2026 has been, by any measure, one of the most turbulent quarters in recent memory. Shifting trade flows, geopolitical volatility, and markets that have kept all of us on our toes. There is plenty to reflect on – and plenty to plan for. But first, lunch – and this year, there was rather more to celebrate than usual. The table did not disappoint. Coronation chicken and smoked salmon finger sandwiches, brie & cranberry and mozzarella & pesto vegetarian platters, chicken pesto pasta salad, falafel with hummus, mixed wraps, a rather magnificent spread of patisserie, chocolate éclairs, cream puffs – and, of course, the Easter eggs that have become something of a Gapuma institution. Raised glasses went to Neha Sampat, Head of Operations, marking a remarkable 15 years with Gapuma – a tenure that speaks for itself. To Stephen Harris, Operations Director, on his birthday. And to Mike Short and Saju Mullumangalam, who both celebrated birthdays on 1st April – a happy coincidence that made the occasion all the more festive. We were also delighted to welcome Luka Bouffard-Innes, our newly recruited Junior Trader, to his first Gapuma Spring Lunch – a proper rite of passage. And there was a very welcome surprise when Group Managing Director Jack Bardakjian made a flying visit, which lifted the room considerably. At Gapuma, we believe that a team which eats together, thinks together. Here’s to Q2.
Is comprehensive globalism over?
What the Iran War means for physical commodity traders 24 March 2026 The Financial Times has been asking hard questions about the structural shift now under way in global business – and the conclusions demand attention from anyone in physical commodities. FT chief economics commentator Martin Wolf is unambiguous: “The worst case is that this will be one of the biggest shocks in the postwar period.” Meanwhile, FT columnist Tej Parikh cuts to a deeper vulnerability: “Investors have committed trillions of dollars to the technology, one of the most power-hungry inventions ever, on the assumption of ample energy supplies and a slick chip production line that can cross more than 70 borders before reaching the final consumer. But the Iran war is exposing the fragilities in the AI supply chain.” If that assumption of frictionless global logistics is now in doubt for the digital economy, it raises an equally sharp question for physical commodity traders: is the model of seamless, borderless trade still viable? The honest answer is: not unconditionally. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz has demonstrated that a single chokepoint can simultaneously disrupt energy, fertiliser, industrial gases and shipping insurance markets. Supply chains engineered for efficiency rather than resilience are being exposed for what they are. Three conclusions stand out. Hyper-globalised sourcing is a liability without redundancy built in. Global trade is not over, but it is being repriced around risk. And those with established local distribution networks are navigating this crisis measurably better than those dependent on long, centralised chains. Jack Bardakjian, Group Managing Director of Gapuma Group, is direct on this point: “Every experienced commodity trader understands that price is only half the equation – the other half is access. When the architecture of global trade is under this kind of stress, access becomes everything. Local presence, local relationships, local knowledge – these are not peripheral considerations. They are the hard infrastructure of the business.” The world will trade again. But the terms on which it does so are being rewritten. Primary source: Financial Times, 12 March 2026, and related FT reporting
GREEN STEEL: SUBSTANCE OR SIGNAL?
19 Ferbuary 2026 By: Shahab Mossavat The steel industry accounts for roughly 7% of global greenhouse gas emissions. If we are serious about decarbonisation, it has to change. But is the emerging green steel market a genuine structural shift, or an expensive exercise in corporate optics? The numbers, right now, suggest something uncomfortably in between. 7% of Global Carbon Emission are Produced by Steel Makers Europe has what passes for an established green steel market — and it is struggling. Traded volumes for flat-rolled green steel remained below 200,000 tonnes throughout 2025, which is vanishingly small against a European market that consumes some 140 million tonnes annually. Fastmarkets’ green steel premium (for product below 0.8 tonnes of CO₂ per tonne of steel) has declined since the start of the year, and sources in the market describe buying as almost entirely project-based — nobody, as one Northern European buyer put it, buys green steel “back-to-back.” The spot market has been virtually non-existent since the start of 2026. That is not a market. That is a pilot programme with a premium attached. Part of the problem is definitional chaos. There is no common standard for what “green steel” even means, and buyers in some regions reportedly have no clear idea what they need. When the foundational vocabulary is contested, credibility suffers — and with it, the willingness to pay. The reduced-carbon tier (1.4–1.8 tCO₂ per tonne) saw its premium fall 50% in just three months to a meagre €25 per tonne, suggesting that when the environmental story becomes incremental rather than transformational, buyers simply revert to price. And yet dismissing green steel entirely would be equally wrong. The structural forces pushing towards it are real and are gathering pace. The EU’s Emissions Trading System is progressively withdrawing free allowances from blast furnace producers, and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, now entering its definitive phase, will impose equivalent carbon costs on imported steel. Analysis by CRU suggests that by 2032, the CBAM charge will have risen sufficiently to theoretically return profit-maximising output for EU mills to pre-ETS levels — meaning the economics of green production will tighten around conventional steelmaking from both ends. ArcelorMittal’s confirmation of a €1.3 billion electric arc furnace in Dunkirk, citing EU policy confidence, is a signal worth noting even if the investment was scaled back from its original ambition. EU is Withdrawing Incentive Schemes The forecasts point towards rising hot-rolled coil prices across all production routes to 2035, with the green premium narrowing but persisting — from roughly 23% today to around 8% by 2035 as EAF capacity expands and legacy blast furnace costs compound under regulation. The trading angle For those of us who remember steel as a traded commodity, there is a further wrinkle. Physical steel trading has largely disintermediated over the past decade; end-users go direct to mills, and the role of the merchant has contracted sharply. Green steel, paradoxically, may be reopening a gap. Because green steel is niche, project-specific, and negotiated on terms that vary considerably between transactions, the information asymmetries that once justified intermediaries are back. Mills producing green product need buyers who understand what they are actually purchasing. Buyers with Scope 3 obligations need supply that is verifiable and documented. That is not a spot market. That is a relationship market — and relationship markets have historically rewarded those who understand both sides of the transaction. Green Steel Sheets and Cold Rolls Whether that translates into a commercial opportunity depends on how quickly mandated demand — through green public procurement under the EU’s forthcoming Industrial Accelerator Act — moves from political intention to contracted reality. One mill source was blunt: large-scale demand for green steel can only be stimulated through public projects. Without that, it remains a niche. The honest verdict is this: green steel is not yet efficient as an environmental instrument, because its scale is too small to move the emissions needle. But the regulatory architecture being constructed around it is serious, and the cost convergence is real and mathematically predictable. The performative phase — buying a few thousand tonnes to put in the sustainability report — is giving way, slowly, to something more structural. The question for commodity-focused businesses is not whether green steel matters. It is whether they are positioned to participate when it does. Gapuma Group monitors developments across physical commodity markets. We welcome discussion from producers, buyers, and investors navigating the energy transition.
RAN, OIL AND THE ART OF THE CONVENIENT CRISIS
19 February 2026 Brent crude pushed above $71.50 yesterday. WTI broke $66. A 4% surge in a single session, with more to follow in early European trading. The headlines wrote themselves: US-Iran tensions, Strait of Hormuz fears, military build-up in the Persian Gulf. All of that is real. But is geopolitical risk genuinely driving this spike, or is it doing the market a useful favour — providing cover for something more structurally inconvenient? Here is the problem the oil market does not particularly want to discuss. The IEA’s implied surplus for 2026 has ballooned to nearly 4 million barrels per day – driven by OPEC+ unwinding its production cuts and relentless output growth from the United States, Canada, Brazil, Guyana and Argentina. Global demand growth is forecast at just 930,000 barrels per day – tepid, weighed down by EV adoption, improving vehicle efficiency and anaemic economic conditions. On paper, this is one of the most oversupplied markets in recent memory. And yet here we are, with Brent at six-month highs. Iranian exports run at roughly 1.5 million barrels per day. Total flows through the Strait of Hormuz reach around 20 million barrels per day. A full-scale disruption would be seismic, potentially erasing the entire surplus at a stroke. The Iran risk is not imaginary. But what it conveniently masks is that the physical market is already tighter than balance sheets suggest – sanctioned oil finding fewer willing buyers, Indian refiners shunning Russian barrels, and the Brent forward curve sitting in backwardation well into 2028. That is not the shape of a market drowning in surplus. Geopolitical crises do not create oil market fundamentals. They temporarily obscure them. When the dust settles – as it eventually does – the surplus will still be there.
Global Growth Steady at 3% – So Why Is Britain Lagging Behind?
12 February 2026 The global economy is maintaining a resilient 3% growth trajectory in 2026, according to the ACCA Global Economic Outlook. Yet Britain’s economy tells a starkly different story. The EY ITEM Club’s Winter Forecast projects UK GDP growth of just 0.9% this year – one of the weakest performances in the G7. More concerning for those of us in physical commodities: business investment is forecast to contract by 0.2% in 2026, a sharp downgrade from November’s 0.8% growth prediction. The contrast is striking. Whilst the US leads G7 growth and emerging markets demonstrate surprising resilience despite unprecedented tariff disruptions, Britain splutters. GDP per capita grew by merely 1% in 2025 after zero growth in 2024 – hardly the transformation promised eighteen months ago. What’s holding the UK back? Persistent policy uncertainty, weak business confidence, and a construction sector in the doldrums despite ambitious housing targets. For commodity traders, the implications are clear: whilst global trade adapts to new realities and maintains momentum, UK domestic demand remains anaemic. The government’s fiscal tightening, frozen income tax thresholds, and employer National Insurance increases are weighing heavily on growth. Meanwhile, our global competitors press ahead. As EY notes, the Bank of England may deliver one final rate cut in April, but monetary policy alone cannot overcome these structural headwinds. For Gapuma Group and the wider commodities sector, the message is unambiguous: opportunity lies in global markets showing genuine dynamism, not in a UK economy stuck in low gear. The world economy is proving adaptable and resilient. Britain needs to match that energy – urgently.
AI and the Future of Physical Commodities Trading
12th November 2025 At Gapuma Group, after 25 years of moving chemicals, fertilisers, and essential commodities from more than 30 countries to over 50 global markets, we are seeing first-hand how artificial intelligence is reshaping the world of physical trading. AI adoption varies widely across our trade routes. In some sourcing markets, AI-driven supply chain systems, automated quality control, and demand forecasting tools are already integrated into daily operations. Elsewhere, progress is slower—often shaped by connectivity limitations, power reliability, and the uneven development of data infrastructure. The technology’s effects are most visible in logistics and price discovery. Predictive models now track port operations, route efficiency, and seasonal demand to optimise cargo flows, particularly for time-sensitive agricultural inputs. Real-time analysis of exchange data, freight markets, and global pricing trends is compressing decision-making windows. Meanwhile, advanced risk models assess everything from currency movements to regulatory changes across multiple jurisdictions simultaneously. Infrastructure remains the decisive factor. High-capacity AI systems perform best where data is structured and connectivity is strong. In other environments, effectiveness depends on agility—mobile-first tools, offline-capable platforms, and lighter models that respond to local trading conditions. At Gapuma, we integrate AI where it adds genuine value—improving logistics, forecasting, and supplier analytics—while remaining grounded in what has always underpinned our business: trusted relationships, deep market knowledge, and sound human judgement. The future of trading is not only digital; it is adaptive.