Supply base
Peru lost 101 alpaca knitwear exporters in two years and the volume stayed
101 of 182 alpaca knitwear exporters have stopped shipping in two years while the volume held. The output stayed and the doors closed.
Key takeaways
- A supplier list built two years ago has lost more than half its names, and the headline volume reports that nothing happened.
- The top three companies went from 45.2% to 49.7% of the value: this is consolidation, and the wider market is doing something different.
- Roughly eight departures for every arrival, so the cost of finding a company rises every year and the names left choose their clients.
The numbers behind this
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Alpaca knitwear exporters two years ago | 182 |
| Of those, no longer appearing | 101 |
| Present in every year | 75 |
| Genuinely new | 12 |
| Alpaca garment volume over the period | flat |
| Top three share of value, then and now | 45.2% to 49.7% |
| The full product code, active companies | 443 to 362, with volume falling too |
A supplier list has a shelf life, and the shipping record puts a number on it.
Most buyers never see it happen. The list was good when it was built, the names on it were real, and nothing announces the day one of them stops shipping. There is no notice, no bounce message and no line in any trade report. The list simply keeps looking like a list.
The roster lost more than half its names
Take the companies that shipped alpaca knitwear out of Peru two years ago. There were 182 of them.
Follow the same registrations forward to today. 101 have stopped appearing altogether. Seventy five are present in every year. Twelve are genuinely new.
Now put the volume next to that. Alpaca garments out of Peru are flat across the same period, with the latest half year slightly ahead of where the count started.
Those two facts together are the whole read. The output did not leave. The places to buy it did.
One hundred and one doors closed and twelve opened
Alpaca knitwear exporters, two year movement
Concentration says the same thing from the other side
The largest three alpaca companies held 45.2% of the value at the start of the period.
Today they hold 49.7%. Half the trade sits with three names, and the share is climbing.
This is consolidation, and the wider market is something else
It is worth checking whether this is the market as a whole contracting, because Peruvian knitwear did contract. The full product code went from 443 active companies to 362 over the same period, and the garment volume fell with them.
But that is the difference. In the wider market, companies and volume left together. In alpaca, the companies left and the volume stayed. One is a market shrinking and the other is a market consolidating, and they call for opposite responses from a buyer.
Call it the Narrowing Bench. The output is intact and the roster carrying it is shorter every year. The replacement flow barely exists: twelve entrants in a year, against 101 exits over two, is roughly eight departures for every arrival.
Half the trade now sits with three names
Concentration of alpaca knitwear exports, start of the period against today
The cost lands on the buyer with a lag
A buyer working from a list built two years ago is working from a list that has lost more than half its names. They will discover this one unanswered email at a time, while the headline volume reports that nothing has happened.
A limit that matters. A company disappearing from the record is not necessarily a company that closed. It may have merged, changed its registration, moved its volume under a group, or stopped exporting directly and started selling through someone who does. What the number proves is that a name that used to ship no longer ships under that name.
Which is enough to act on. If the number of doors is falling while the volume behind them holds, the cost of finding a company goes up every year.
A mechanism I can suggest but cannot prove
Fibre supply, working capital and the cost of holding a classed inventory all favour the larger operator in a bad year. Whatever the cause, the effect compounds in the same direction. Every year the list is shorter, the remaining names are larger, and larger names quote larger minimums.
There is one more effect worth naming, and it lands on the buyer rather than on the market. A shorter roster means a company that would have quoted eagerly two years ago now has more work than bench, and chooses its clients. So the same email that used to open a conversation now competes with several others for the same floor.
The list did not only get shorter. The names left on it got harder to reach, which makes the cheapest time to build the relationship always earlier than it feels.
Common questions
How many Peruvian alpaca knitwear exporters are left?
Of the 182 shipping two years ago, 101 have stopped appearing, 75 are present in every year and 12 are genuinely new.
Did the alpaca volume fall with them?
No. Alpaca garment volume is flat across the same period, with the latest half year slightly ahead of where the count started.
Is the whole Peruvian knitwear market shrinking?
The wider code went from 443 to 362 active companies and its volume fell with them. In alpaca the companies left and the volume stayed, which is consolidation rather than contraction.
Does a company vanishing from the record mean it closed?
Not necessarily. It may have merged, changed registration, moved volume under a group or stopped exporting directly. What is proven is that the name no longer ships.
What does this cost a buyer in practice?
A list built two years ago has lost more than half its names, discovered one unanswered email at a time, and the companies still shipping have more work than bench and choose their clients.
Tell us the spec. We come back with whether a real supplier base exists for it.
We work only in camelid fibre, on the ground in Peru. You get the companies that already ship what you are asking for, at the size and the grade you are asking for.
The next one
Get the pieces as they go out
A short read on how the Peruvian fine fibre market actually behaves. No calendar, no filler.