<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The reign of container terminals as profit leaders in supply chains is under pressure.</div>

The reign of container terminals as profit leaders in supply chains is under pressure.

<div>The reign of container terminals as profit leaders in supply chains is under pressure at the moment as <a>poor throughput growth</a>, excess capacity and <a>declining revenue</a> become an increasingly <a>common story</a>.With a generally poor outlook for global trade, operators are concerned over business prospects in the short-to-medium term, while fears of overexposure to world regions where there is a high probability of overcapacity cloud the longer term.A big concern is that having exhausted numerous other means of reducing costs, struggling liner shipping companies are focusing harder on bringing down terminal handling bills. This could significantly dent the healthy return on...

The reign of container terminals as profit leaders in supply chains is under pressure at the moment as poor throughput growth , excess capacity and declining revenue become an increasingly common story . With a generally poor outlook for global trade, operators are concerned over business prospects in the short-to-medium term, while fears of overexposure to world regions where there is a high probability of overcapacity cloud the longer term. A big concern is that having exhausted numerous other means of reducing costs, struggling liner shipping companies are focusing harder on bringing down terminal handling bills. This could significantly dent the healthy return on capital and strong profit margins that terminal operators have enjoyed for decades. Signs of stress surface As the midyear reporting season unfolds there are clear signs of stress, and little relief expected at least the remainder of this year. For DP World , a 1.4 percent drop in like-for-like year-over-year throughout in the first half precipitated the slowing of capacity expansion plans at its flagship transshipment hub at Jebel Ali, which suffered a 6 percent fall in volumes over the first six months of the year. DP World still managed growth in like-for-like revenue and net income of 2.5 percent and 4.3 percent in the six months to June and did not announce any significant reduction in projected capital expenditure for the remainder of the year. However, management of the Dubai-based company is treading more carefully in softer global trade conditions. Netherlands-headquartered APM Terminals, the terminal operating arm of the Maersk Group, managed like-for-like year-over-year throughput growth of just 0.2 percent in the second quarter. Profit fell 30 percent in the period after a fall of 41 percent in the first quarter. APMT was hit by exposure to oil-exporting developing economies such as Nigeria, and comments by group CEO Soren Skou at the time of the group’s half-year results announcement suggest it is suffering too from lower rates paid by its biggest customer, Maersk Line. Throughput and revenues slid 7 percent and 6 percent in the first half of the year at Singapore-listed Hutchison Port Holdings Trust after the company, which owns deep-sea container terminals in Hong Kong and mainland China, reported a 1 percent decline in volumes and flat revenue growth in 2015. HPH Trust’s first-half results were an improvement on those of the first quarter, but management said it remained cautious on volumes for the rest of the year, given the poor outlook for global trade and fallout from Britain’s exit from the European Union. Throughput at lowest point since financial crisis Container throughput growth at the top 30 ports in the world, which account for around half of global container throughput, was just 0.2 percent year-over-year in the first half, its lowest level since 2009. Volumes will probably only marginally improve over the remainder of the year. There are some bright spots, primarily in emerging markets in South Asia and Southeast Asia. Operators with a higher proportion of facilities in these markets, such as Manila’s International Container Terminal Services Inc., have delivered growth ahead of the market. China, too, hasn’t delivered a completely terrible story. While first-half volume growth at China’s main ports was only around 1 percent to 2 percent, there are parts of the country where growth is relatively good and operators in these regions have benefitted. Hong Kong-listed Cosco Shipping Ports (formerly Cosco Pacific), which has less exposure to southern China than HPH, managed to handle 2 million 20-foot-equivalent units more in the first seven months of 2016 than it did in the same period last year, representing decent growth of 3.5 percent in a challenging global trade environment. The numbers for its China terminals in July showed a significant amount of volatility, though, ranging from high double-digit percentage growth to high double-digit declines at different facilities. This is at least in part due to shifting liner business in a market where competition for handling work is becoming more intense. A longer-term look at global capacity indicates container terminal overcapacity in many key world regions. A study released earlier in the year by the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development's International Transport Forum said regions such as China, Western Europe and the Middle East are severely over-planning container terminal capacity needs for the coming decade and a half. With planned container port capacity of 383.8 million TEUs by 2030 and projected volumes of 290 million TEUs, China will have a capacity excess of 93.8 million TEUs by 2030, ITF said, while planned capacity of 238.2 million TEUs and 137.6 million TEUs will create excess capacity of 88.8 million TEUs and 87.6 million TEUs in Western Europe and the Middle East. Of the world’s 18 major sea areas, only in the case of South Asia does projected demand outstrip capacity, ITF said. The same is true for Southeast Asia, when sensitivity analysis for uncertainties including future economic growth and trade elasticities was applied. Container lines could add to the pressure In the short term, the biggest concern for operators may be the indications they will come under more pressure from loss-making shipping lines looking for better handling rates. Low oil prices mean that for many shipping lines terminal handling costs represent the largest single cost item on the balance sheet, up to 30 percent of total costs in many cases, and in the current environment of excess capacity and the exhaustion of multiple other cost-reduction efforts, terminal handling fees are an obvious target. “One of the last cost items to become deflationary, so to speak, has been terminal cost, because, generally, terminal operators have been in good negotiating position,” Soren Skou said during the call following the Maerk Group’s most recent results announcement. “Increasingly, we see more opportunities for procurement from the carrier side, both because the carriers are consolidating, but also because there is too much excess capacity on the terminal side now. And therefore, we do believe that terminal cost will become deflationary.” Given the number of mid- to long-term contracts between carriers and terminals, achieving lower terminal costs to a large degree would likely involve dissolving and renegotiating contracts, a process that will almost certainly put further strain on carrier-terminal business relationships, which are often already very strained. As one senior, Asia-based industry commentator put it: “Following the very visible worst-practice set in the industry of loss-giving freight revenues resulting in deteriorating service levels, taking a machete to your terminal vendors will be akin to peeing in one’s own pants on a winter’s day — short-term comfort for long-term pain.” A better approach would be a collaborative one that looks to access the oodles of untapped value in improved berth and port productivity. “The smarter lines and terminals, who have excellent cost transparency, visibility and traceability, will come together to improve operating models and behaviours — and jointly rip cost out of the system for mutual gains.” Contact Turloch Mooney at turloch.mooney@ihsmarkit.com and follow him on Twitter: @TurlochMooney .A version of this story originally appeared on IHS Fairplay, a sister product of JOC.com within IHS Markit.

Maritime

Container lines

Port News

Low volume growth squeezing global terminal operators' profits

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Denmark-based carrier has been growing its multipurpose vessel (MPV) fleet since entering the project cargo sector with the acquisition of Thorco Projects in 2023.</div>

The Denmark-based carrier has been growing its multipurpose vessel (MPV) fleet since entering the project cargo sector with the acquisition of Thorco Projects in 2023.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Norden is further expanding its multipurpose vessel (MPV) fleet after signing lease agreements for two new 17,500-deadweight ton (dwt) ships scheduled for delivery in 2026 and 2027, the company said in a statement Monday. The vessels, in addition to lease deals announced in January for up to four 17,500-dwt MPVs also expected to hit the water in 2026 and 2027, will expand the Denmark-based carrier’s MPV fleet to around 50 ships, a Norden spokesperson told the Journal of Commerce. Under the terms of the deals announced Monday, Norden will have the option to purchase the vessels, which will be biofuel compatible and feature a similar design to the ships it agreed to lease in January. The ships will be deployed in Norden’s projects and parceling division, which generated $90 million in revenue in the first quarter, up from $55 million in the same three-month period last year, according to the firm’s latest financial statements. Norden, which entered the sector in June 2023 with the acquisition of Thorco Projects, said the latest orders reinforce “our commitment to building a core [MPV] fleet and growing our presence in the project cargo market.” The expansion comes amid “a strong projected demand outlook coupled with a rapidly ageing fleet and low order book,” the company added. According to data from shipbroking house Clarksons, there are 197 MPVs with a combined capacity of 4 million dwt on order for delivery through 2028, compared with a global fleet of 3,371 ships (32 million dwt). Shipbroker Toepfer Transport estimates the average age of the MPV fleet is around 18 years with about 35% of vessels in need of replacement over the next five to 10 years. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

Norden is further expanding its multipurpose vessel (MPV) fleet after signing lease agreements for two new 17,500-deadweight ton (dwt) ships scheduled for delivery in 2026 and 2027, the company said in a statement Monday. The vessels, in addition to lease deals announced in January for up to four 17,500-dwt MPVs also expected to hit the water in 2026 and 2027, will expand the Denmark-based carrier’s MPV fleet to around 50 ships, a Norden spokesperson told the Journal of Commerce. Under the terms of the deals announced Monday, Norden will have the option to purchase the vessels, which will be biofuel compatible and feature a similar design to the ships it agreed to lease in January. The ships will be deployed in Norden’s projects and parceling division, which generated $90 million in revenue in the first quarter, up from $55 million in the same three-month period last year, according to the firm’s latest financial statements. Norden, which entered the sector in June 2023 with the acquisition of Thorco Projects, said the latest orders reinforce “our commitment to building a core [MPV] fleet and growing our presence in the project cargo market.” The expansion comes amid “a strong projected demand outlook coupled with a rapidly ageing fleet and low order book,” the company added. According to data from shipbroking house Clarksons, there are 197 MPVs with a combined capacity of 4 million dwt on order for delivery through 2028, compared with a global fleet of 3,371 ships (32 million dwt). Shipbroker Toepfer Transport estimates the average age of the MPV fleet is around 18 years with about 35% of vessels in need of replacement over the next five to 10 years. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Breakbulk carriers

Project cargo

Breakbulk News

Norden continues MPV expansion amid ‘strong projected demand’

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Caterpillar and Deere are counting the sizeable costs of tariff-related expenses, even with the announced 90-day tariff pause between the US and China. </div>

Caterpillar and Deere are counting the sizeable costs of tariff-related expenses, even with the announced 90-day tariff pause between the US and China.

<div class="phx-topic">Heavy equipment manufacturers Caterpillar and Deere are feeling the sting of global import tariffs, with Deere bracing for a half-billion dollars in tariff expenses in 2025, according to the companies’ latest quarterly earnings results. Although both US-based high-and-heavy manufacturers produce and source much of their equipment domestically, they also rely on imports for goods and components. The companies are considered bellwether roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) cargo providers and breakbulk shippers. Illinois-based Deere &amp; Company estimates it will incur $500 million in tariff costs for the fiscal year, even after factoring in a 90-day reduction announced by the Trump administration for reciprocal and retaliatory tariffs between the US and China beginning May 14. “This quarter was marked by historic levels of volatility and significant uncertainty across our end markets given the dynamic global trade backdrop,” Deere chairman and CEO John May said in the earnings call. Deere sources over three-fourths of its complete goods and components in the United States, but global imports — mostly from Mexico and Europe — account for the remainder. “The trade environment is certainly fluid, evidenced by trade agreements and adjustments to tariff levels announced in this past week,” Deere investor relations director Josh Beal said in the company’s second-quarter earnings call on May 15. Deere reported $100 million in tariff expenses in the second quarter, while the company adjusted its profit outlook downward for the full fiscal year. Overall net sales and revenues fell 16% to $12.8 billion in the second quarter and dropped 22% to $21.3 billion for the first half of the year. Equipment sales in all of Deere’s sectors continued to slide, with the sharpest declines in construction and forestry (23% to $2.5 billion) and in production and precision agriculture (21% to $5.2 billion). <h3>Caterpillar looks to tariff relief </h3>Tariff reductions for China could soften the $250 million to $350 million blow Texas-based Caterpillar is preparing to endure in the upcoming quarter because of these duties, according to the company’s first-quarter earnings results, released April 30. Half of those costs are expected to cut into the company’s construction equipment segment. Another 25% would affect Deere’s mining equipment business, while energy and transportation equipment would account for the remaining quarter of the tariff expenses. In his remarks in the company’s April 30 earnings call, Caterpillar chief operating officer Joseph Creed said the tariff situation remains in flux but that Caterpillar is closely monitoring developments and evaluating various long-term mitigation strategies. “Many of these actions require more time to implement and are more difficult to reverse, and therefore require more clarity and certainty on the long-term environment around tariffs,” Creed said in the company’s April 30 earnings call. Imports from China would create about half of Caterpillar’s tariff expenses. Speaking ahead of the Trump administration’s announcement to temporarily lower its maximum tariff rate on Chinese imports from 145% to 30%, chief financial officer Andrew Bonfield said easing up on tariffs could bring about a “significant reduction” in its estimated costs. The tariff cost projections came as Caterpillar reported a 10% decline in sales to $14.2 billion in the first quarter, with the company citing changes in dealer inventories. Sales fell across all of Caterpillar’s machinery, energy and transportation segments, with the steepest drop being in construction equipment, which fell 19% to $5.2 billion. The company is projecting that revenues should be flat for the remainder of 2025. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>. </div>

Heavy equipment manufacturers Caterpillar and Deere are feeling the sting of global import tariffs, with Deere bracing for a half-billion dollars in tariff expenses in 2025, according to the companies’ latest quarterly earnings results. Although both US-based high-and-heavy manufacturers produce and source much of their equipment domestically, they also rely on imports for goods and components. The companies are considered bellwether roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) cargo providers and breakbulk shippers. Illinois-based Deere & Company estimates it will incur $500 million in tariff costs for the fiscal year, even after factoring in a 90-day reduction announced by the Trump administration for reciprocal and retaliatory tariffs between the US and China beginning May 14. “This quarter was marked by historic levels of volatility and significant uncertainty across our end markets given the dynamic global trade backdrop,” Deere chairman and CEO John May said in the earnings call. Deere sources over three-fourths of its complete goods and components in the United States, but global imports — mostly from Mexico and Europe — account for the remainder. “The trade environment is certainly fluid, evidenced by trade agreements and adjustments to tariff levels announced in this past week,” Deere investor relations director Josh Beal said in the company’s second-quarter earnings call on May 15. Deere reported $100 million in tariff expenses in the second quarter, while the company adjusted its profit outlook downward for the full fiscal year. Overall net sales and revenues fell 16% to $12.8 billion in the second quarter and dropped 22% to $21.3 billion for the first half of the year. Equipment sales in all of Deere’s sectors continued to slide, with the sharpest declines in construction and forestry (23% to $2.5 billion) and in production and precision agriculture (21% to $5.2 billion). Caterpillar looks to tariff relief Tariff reductions for China could soften the $250 million to $350 million blow Texas-based Caterpillar is preparing to endure in the upcoming quarter because of these duties, according to the company’s first-quarter earnings results, released April 30. Half of those costs are expected to cut into the company’s construction equipment segment. Another 25% would affect Deere’s mining equipment business, while energy and transportation equipment would account for the remaining quarter of the tariff expenses. In his remarks in the company’s April 30 earnings call, Caterpillar chief operating officer Joseph Creed said the tariff situation remains in flux but that Caterpillar is closely monitoring developments and evaluating various long-term mitigation strategies. “Many of these actions require more time to implement and are more difficult to reverse, and therefore require more clarity and certainty on the long-term environment around tariffs,” Creed said in the company’s April 30 earnings call. Imports from China would create about half of Caterpillar’s tariff expenses. Speaking ahead of the Trump administration’s announcement to temporarily lower its maximum tariff rate on Chinese imports from 145% to 30%, chief financial officer Andrew Bonfield said easing up on tariffs could bring about a “significant reduction” in its estimated costs. The tariff cost projections came as Caterpillar reported a 10% decline in sales to $14.2 billion in the first quarter, with the company citing changes in dealer inventories. Sales fell across all of Caterpillar’s machinery, energy and transportation segments, with the steepest drop being in construction equipment, which fell 19% to $5.2 billion. The company is projecting that revenues should be flat for the remainder of 2025. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Trans-Pacific

Supply chain

High-and-heavy shippers sound alarm on rising tariff costs

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The purchase of Outgo, founded in 2022, is meant to help DAT gather more transactional data but also to make its freight marketplace more complete for carriers and brokers. </div>

The purchase of Outgo, founded in 2022, is meant to help DAT gather more transactional data but also to make its freight marketplace more complete for carriers and brokers.

<div class="phx-topic">DAT Freight &amp; Analytics has acquired a payments and factoring technology provider that caters to truckload carriers in an attempt to make its freight load board more useful and trustworthy for both carriers and brokers. The acquired company, Outgo, was founded in 2022 by veterans of Uber and now defunct freight broker Convoy. Terms of the deal, announced Thursday, were not disclosed. Outgo will be integrated within DAT One, the company’s carrier-facing platform, with any loads that have been approved for factoring services noted by a blue checkmark. Carriers can use the tool to get paid no longer than four hours after issuing an invoice, even if their payment terms with brokers are 30 days or longer. Freight factoring is a financial service in which carriers sell their unpaid invoices to a third party that advances them the cash they are owed, generally in exchange for a single-digit percentage of the invoice amount. The acquisition helps round out DAT’s offerings, which include a rate benchmarking platform for a large swathe of the truckload market. DAT, the largest load board for truckload freight in North America, has offered factoring services to its carrier customers since 2007 via external partnerships, most recently with OTR Solutions. The move also comes just a few months after Triumph Financial, a large factoring provider, purchased DAT competitor Greenscreens.ai. Describing Outgo as “fintech meets freight,” CEO Jeff Clementz said the acquisition is designed to provide augmented value for carriers beyond just finding available loads to move. Adding integrated factoring services comes as carriers struggle with a persistently low-rate truckload market where cash flow is paramount. “Outgo will be our focus going forward,” Clementz told the Journal of Commerce. Clementz said bringing factoring in-house allows DAT to not only glean data from transactions but also to build trust with carriers and brokers, who would see DAT as a more comprehensive marketplace. “It’s not just being paid, it’s giving you a banking-like platform,” he said. “Our mission is to create the most trusted marketplace in freight.” Outgo automates broker setup, invoicing, factoring and collections without long-term contracts or minimums. It commits to settling approved unpaid invoices within four hours, with many processed in 15 to 90 minutes. Outgo’s technology also lets carriers use what it calls “partial” factoring, where an invoice can be partly factored to cover the costs of running their businesses, rather than taking a discounted payment for an entire invoice. “We felt there was a better way for carriers to manage their cashflow,” Outgo CEO Marcus Womack told the Journal of Commerce. “On a 30-day payable, they have high operating costs with fuel and payroll. They generally have to accept early payment on all of the invoice, where we give them flexibility to fund what they need in a payment cycle.” Womack and all 30 of Outgo’s employees will move to DAT as part of the transaction. The acquisition is DAT’s second in six months, after it acquired Trucker Tools, a load visibility tool for brokers, in December. Clementz called the acquisitions part of a strategy to better leverage DAT’s presence in the market. Responding to issues around system downtime and the increasing threat of freight fraud and theft, DAT has also invested in identity authentication tools for carriers and carrier management tools for brokers. “We’ll have the largest list of factorable brokers in the industry,” Clementz said. “We’ll know who these carriers are and pass that trust onto the broker. Eventually the goal is to make sure every time they connect, they feel more confident that their freight will move successfully.” Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto: eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

DAT Freight & Analytics has acquired a payments and factoring technology provider that caters to truckload carriers in an attempt to make its freight load board more useful and trustworthy for both carriers and brokers. The acquired company, Outgo, was founded in 2022 by veterans of Uber and now defunct freight broker Convoy. Terms of the deal, announced Thursday, were not disclosed. Outgo will be integrated within DAT One, the company’s carrier-facing platform, with any loads that have been approved for factoring services noted by a blue checkmark. Carriers can use the tool to get paid no longer than four hours after issuing an invoice, even if their payment terms with brokers are 30 days or longer. Freight factoring is a financial service in which carriers sell their unpaid invoices to a third party that advances them the cash they are owed, generally in exchange for a single-digit percentage of the invoice amount. The acquisition helps round out DAT’s offerings, which include a rate benchmarking platform for a large swathe of the truckload market. DAT, the largest load board for truckload freight in North America, has offered factoring services to its carrier customers since 2007 via external partnerships, most recently with OTR Solutions. The move also comes just a few months after Triumph Financial, a large factoring provider, purchased DAT competitor Greenscreens.ai. Describing Outgo as “fintech meets freight,” CEO Jeff Clementz said the acquisition is designed to provide augmented value for carriers beyond just finding available loads to move. Adding integrated factoring services comes as carriers struggle with a persistently low-rate truckload market where cash flow is paramount. “Outgo will be our focus going forward,” Clementz told the Journal of Commerce. Clementz said bringing factoring in-house allows DAT to not only glean data from transactions but also to build trust with carriers and brokers, who would see DAT as a more comprehensive marketplace. “It’s not just being paid, it’s giving you a banking-like platform,” he said. “Our mission is to create the most trusted marketplace in freight.” Outgo automates broker setup, invoicing, factoring and collections without long-term contracts or minimums. It commits to settling approved unpaid invoices within four hours, with many processed in 15 to 90 minutes. Outgo’s technology also lets carriers use what it calls “partial” factoring, where an invoice can be partly factored to cover the costs of running their businesses, rather than taking a discounted payment for an entire invoice. “We felt there was a better way for carriers to manage their cashflow,” Outgo CEO Marcus Womack told the Journal of Commerce. “On a 30-day payable, they have high operating costs with fuel and payroll. They generally have to accept early payment on all of the invoice, where we give them flexibility to fund what they need in a payment cycle.” Womack and all 30 of Outgo’s employees will move to DAT as part of the transaction. The acquisition is DAT’s second in six months, after it acquired Trucker Tools, a load visibility tool for brokers, in December. Clementz called the acquisitions part of a strategy to better leverage DAT’s presence in the market. Responding to issues around system downtime and the increasing threat of freight fraud and theft, DAT has also invested in identity authentication tools for carriers and carrier management tools for brokers. “We’ll have the largest list of factorable brokers in the industry,” Clementz said. “We’ll know who these carriers are and pass that trust onto the broker. Eventually the goal is to make sure every time they connect, they feel more confident that their freight will move successfully.” Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

Logistics Technology News

Truck brokers

Truckload

DAT adds in-house factoring services with latest acquisition

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Container lines are looking to capitalize on a ramp-up in Asia-US bookings during the 90-day tariff reduction that followed Monday’s deal between the Trump administration and China.</div>

Container lines are looking to capitalize on a ramp-up in Asia-US bookings during the 90-day tariff reduction that followed Monday’s deal between the Trump administration and China.

<div class="phx-topic">Major container lines are seeking spot rates on service from China to the US West Coast that are more than double the current level as they look to capitalize on an anticipated surge of volume triggered by a 90-day pause in the steepest US tariffs. Container spot rates are already spiking following the Monday announcement, and if carriers are successful in imposing a combination of general rate increases (GRIs) and peak season surcharges (PSSs) set to take effect June 1, pricing would jump to approximately $6,000 per FEU to the West Coast and $7,000 per FEU to the East Coast. GRIs apply to all shippers regardless of size, while PSSs are only imposed on smaller shippers that don’t have agreements with carriers prohibiting their use. Momentum appears to be on the carriers’ side. Hapag-Lloyd said it has seen <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/china-us-ocean-bookings-surge-since-weekend-trade-deal-hapag-lloyd-6004653">a 50% increase in bookings</a> from China to the US this week, while forwarders have reported jumps as high as 100%. Given the short window of the agreement, and the need to ship fall and holiday merchandise before tariffs may increase if the deal falls apart, forwarders report that bookings are soaring. “It’s shades of 2024,” Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV, told the Journal of Commerce, referring to last summer, when container spot rates jumped to upward of $8,000 per FEU to the West Coast during acrimonious dockworker contract negotiations on the East and Gulf coasts. As of Wednesday, average spot rates from Asia to the West Coast rose to $2,567 per FEU, up from $1,600 per FEU at the end of March, while Asia-East Coast pricing rose to $3,567 per FEU from $2,600 per FEU during the same period, according to Platts, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Last year, spot rates <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/carriers-to-deploy-extra-loaders-to-los-angeles-long-beach-amid-import-surge-5714861">peaked at $8,133 per FEU to the West Coast</a> and $10,133 per FEU to the East Coast in the week of July 5. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="46178020-96a6-492f-89e0-3e6fc2624113"></dynamic-object></div>Carriers Hapag-Lloyd, Mediterranean Shipping Co., CMA CGM, Ocean Network Express (ONE) and Zim Integrated Shipping have filed spot rates of $6,000 per FEU starting June 1. Another round of increases is poised for June 15, with Hapag-Lloyd, MSC and CMA CGM set to increase rates to $8,000 per FEU, according to rate notices from the carriers. “Of course, these are just their filings,” noted a forwarder who asked not to be identified. “We will see what levels they really pass on once we get to these dates.” <h3>Bookings from China surge </h3>The carrier rate increases appear to be supported by a spike in bookings since the US and China announced an agreement that reduced US tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 30% for at least the next 90 days. “There’s definitely been a ramp up in orders during this 90-day window,” said Robert Khachatryan, CEO of forwarder Freight Right Global Logistics. Khachatryan explained that importers appear to be in a rush to get their shipments into the US while the 30% tariff on China is in effect. They are concerned that after 90 days, if a permanent agreement is not reached, the tariffs could shoot back up. “Everyone seems to be concerned with the 90-day window,” Khachatryan said. Revelyst, an importer of outdoor apparel, paused its purchase orders with factories in China in April, said John Pace, senior manager of global logistics. Now, the company is prioritizing those shipments that are ready to move, to be followed by shipments that will depart in the coming weeks as factories ramp up production. A carrier executive who asked not to be identified told the Journal of Commerce that factories in China should be able to quickly increase production as most vendors paused or slowed down production after the 145% duty went into effect in early April, rather than completely shutting down and laying off staff. Similar to Khachatryan, the carrier executive said importers are frontloading as much merchandise as they can. “They have to ship now in case there is another tariff increase in August,” the source said. However, forwarders and importers say the huge increases in spot rates and surcharges that carriers announced over the past few days would put a large dent in the savings they had anticipated from the tariff cuts. “We are being careful,” Pace said. “Shipping rates are certainly a factor in our decisions.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:laura.robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Major container lines are seeking spot rates on service from China to the US West Coast that are more than double the current level as they look to capitalize on an anticipated surge of volume triggered by a 90-day pause in the steepest US tariffs. Container spot rates are already spiking following the Monday announcement, and if carriers are successful in imposing a combination of general rate increases (GRIs) and peak season surcharges (PSSs) set to take effect June 1, pricing would jump to approximately $6,000 per FEU to the West Coast and $7,000 per FEU to the East Coast. GRIs apply to all shippers regardless of size, while PSSs are only imposed on smaller shippers that don’t have agreements with carriers prohibiting their use. Momentum appears to be on the carriers’ side. Hapag-Lloyd said it has seen a 50% increase in bookings from China to the US this week, while forwarders have reported jumps as high as 100%. Given the short window of the agreement, and the need to ship fall and holiday merchandise before tariffs may increase if the deal falls apart, forwarders report that bookings are soaring. “It’s shades of 2024,” Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV, told the Journal of Commerce, referring to last summer, when container spot rates jumped to upward of $8,000 per FEU to the West Coast during acrimonious dockworker contract negotiations on the East and Gulf coasts. As of Wednesday, average spot rates from Asia to the West Coast rose to $2,567 per FEU, up from $1,600 per FEU at the end of March, while Asia-East Coast pricing rose to $3,567 per FEU from $2,600 per FEU during the same period, according to Platts, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Last year, spot rates peaked at $8,133 per FEU to the West Coast and $10,133 per FEU to the East Coast in the week of July 5. Carriers Hapag-Lloyd, Mediterranean Shipping Co., CMA CGM, Ocean Network Express (ONE) and Zim Integrated Shipping have filed spot rates of $6,000 per FEU starting June 1. Another round of increases is poised for June 15, with Hapag-Lloyd, MSC and CMA CGM set to increase rates to $8,000 per FEU, according to rate notices from the carriers. “Of course, these are just their filings,” noted a forwarder who asked not to be identified. “We will see what levels they really pass on once we get to these dates.” Bookings from China surge The carrier rate increases appear to be supported by a spike in bookings since the US and China announced an agreement that reduced US tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 30% for at least the next 90 days. “There’s definitely been a ramp up in orders during this 90-day window,” said Robert Khachatryan, CEO of forwarder Freight Right Global Logistics. Khachatryan explained that importers appear to be in a rush to get their shipments into the US while the 30% tariff on China is in effect. They are concerned that after 90 days, if a permanent agreement is not reached, the tariffs could shoot back up. “Everyone seems to be concerned with the 90-day window,” Khachatryan said. Revelyst, an importer of outdoor apparel, paused its purchase orders with factories in China in April, said John Pace, senior manager of global logistics. Now, the company is prioritizing those shipments that are ready to move, to be followed by shipments that will depart in the coming weeks as factories ramp up production. A carrier executive who asked not to be identified told the Journal of Commerce that factories in China should be able to quickly increase production as most vendors paused or slowed down production after the 145% duty went into effect in early April, rather than completely shutting down and laying off staff. Similar to Khachatryan, the carrier executive said importers are frontloading as much merchandise as they can. “They have to ship now in case there is another tariff increase in August,” the source said. However, forwarders and importers say the huge increases in spot rates and surcharges that carriers announced over the past few days would put a large dent in the savings they had anticipated from the tariff cuts. “We are being careful,” Pace said. “Shipping rates are certainly a factor in our decisions.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com . Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .

Container Shipping News

Forwarding

Trans-Pacific carriers announce massive June rate hikes

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Industry backlash mitigated the costliest components of the US Trade Representative’s proposed fees, but surcharges from some carriers are still likely on the way, writes Executive Editor Mark Szakonyi. </div>

Industry backlash mitigated the costliest components of the US Trade Representative’s proposed fees, but surcharges from some carriers are still likely on the way, writes Executive Editor Mark Szakonyi.

<div class="phx-topic">The revised US plan to tax Chinese tonnage released last month is staggeringly less disruptive to the shipping industry than what was first released in February but still stands to increase shipping costs. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6005401_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Most container lines will be on the hook for approximately $1 million per voyage, a significant climbdown from the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-port-fees-could-hit-chinese-ships-under-trump-trade-proposal-5949409">$1 million to $1.5 million per port call initially outlined</a> when the plan was introduced by the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Feb. 21. That plan would have cost the industry $24 billion, according to maritime analyst Lars Jensen. “It’s definitely a vast improvement over the first version,” said Stuart Sandlin, Hapag-Lloyd’s North America president, adding that the original plan would have cost the carrier nearly $90 million weekly. “That’s a big number and now it’s not. It’s dramatically less than that.” The industry backlash to the original proposal came on multiple fronts. <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/farm-state-house-members-say-ustr-proposal-offers-big-risks-to-us-ag-interests-5977289">Agriculture exporters warned</a> of additional costs that carriers would pass onto them and smaller ports fretted about lost services if fees were assessed at each port call. Central American, Caribbean and niche vessel operators testified to being <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ustrs-china-tonnage-tax-would-squeeze-smaller-trades-stakeholders-5967638">unable to spread the stiff port fees</a> across their smaller cargo capacity, while major carriers lobbied in the backroom. Federal Maritime Chairman Louis Sola said the agency also helped the USTR understand the implications, with ultimately all of the maritime regulators’ recommendations being implemented in the latest version. “We put our fingers on the scale to minimize some of the impacts on the industry that were not contemplated in the original proposal,” Sola said in a May 8 interview, stressing that it was an industrywide effort. The <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/scaled-back-ustr-port-tariff-to-hit-chinese-carriers-hardest-5987549">revised version exempts</a> Chinese-built ships in US-flag fleets, container ships that are 4,000 TEUs or smaller, voyages of less than 2,000 nautical miles or Chinese-built ships owned by US-based carriers. <h3>Per voyage vs. per call </h3>Carriers will be levied solely on the first US port calls rather than on each US call, and tonnage taxes are capped at five sailings annually. Equally important, carriers will no longer be penalized come October for having Chinese-built vessels in their fleet — only for the Chinese-built vessels they deploy on US trades. The modification to the tonnage tax plan incentivizes carriers to remove China-built ships from US trades and replace them with vessels constructed in South Korea and Japan. “We do have options, and we are evaluating those options as we speak,” Fabio Santucci, president of US operations for Mediterranean Shipping Co., said at the Georgia International Trade Conference in late April. “Implementation is October, so I really think everybody has plenty of time to adjust and plan.” So far, it looks like MSC will not have to undergo too many changes to accommodate the new fees. Based on current schedules, only two of the nine ships in MSC’s Pearl Shikra service to the US West Coast are Chinese-built — the 9,408-TEU MSC Desiree and the 8,496-TEU MSC Benin. The carrier’s two other trans-Pacific West Coast services primarily use South Korean-built vessels, along with a few Japanese ones. Other carriers, though, may have more work to do to mitigate the fees. Five of the 12 ships currently in the Gemini Cooperation’s US2 service to the US East Coast are Chinese built, with those under long-term charter by Gemini partner Hapag-Lloyd. <h3>Bearing a larger brunt </h3>Cosco and OOCL don’t have that ability and face tariffs more than twice as large as their peers. The USTR doesn’t mince words on its goal, saying the aim is “to further disincentivize use of Chinese shipping services.” Cosco and OOCL handle the largest share of the trans-Pacific market, accounting for 17% of US import moves from Asia in March, according to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within PIERS. The cost of drawing the White House’s ire per TEU is steep. Consultancy Bluspark estimates the tonnage taxes rates rising over the next three years will equate to between $550 and $1,600 per TEU for Chinese operators, compared with a $175 to $400 per TEU ramp-up for carriers not domiciled in China. That could spur Cosco and OOCL to lean on their Ocean Alliance partners CMA CGM and Evergreen Line. In such a scenario, Cosco and OOCL would shift their trans-Pacific vessels to other trades while keeping access to the US market through their vessel sharing agreement with Evergreen and CMA CGM. The easing of US and China tariffs on goods and commodities announced Monday also opens the door for deals in which the tonnage tariff is leveraged for something the Trump administration wants. In the meantime, container lines are already eyeing surcharges and considering how to mitigate the imminent increase in operating costs. “There’s going to be a cost increase somewhere for someone and we will have to assume that there will be reverberations outside of the US as well because everything is connected,” Santucci said. Not all carriers are preparing to impose surcharges tied to USTR, with Maersk telling customers May 8 it didn’t foresee a need for new fees nor a change in its service rotation. Just 5% of Maerk’s global volumes come from China. President Donald Trump’s effort to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trumps-expansionist-worldview-puts-us-maritime-interests-in-spotlight-5946935">galvanize US shipbuilding</a> and knock China for subsidizing its own industry may change what ships call the United States, but it doesn’t seem to be denting Chinese shipyard production. Of the 93 container ship orders made to Chinese shipyards this year, 62 have been placed since the February release of the original tariff plan, according to an HSBC investor analysis placed on order since May 8. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mailto:mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a>. Senior Editor Michael Angell contributed to this column. </div>

The revised US plan to tax Chinese tonnage released last month is staggeringly less disruptive to the shipping industry than what was first released in February but still stands to increase shipping costs. Most container lines will be on the hook for approximately $1 million per voyage, a significant climbdown from the $1 million to $1.5 million per port call initially outlined when the plan was introduced by the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Feb. 21. That plan would have cost the industry $24 billion, according to maritime analyst Lars Jensen. “It’s definitely a vast improvement over the first version,” said Stuart Sandlin, Hapag-Lloyd’s North America president, adding that the original plan would have cost the carrier nearly $90 million weekly. “That’s a big number and now it’s not. It’s dramatically less than that.” The industry backlash to the original proposal came on multiple fronts. Agriculture exporters warned of additional costs that carriers would pass onto them and smaller ports fretted about lost services if fees were assessed at each port call. Central American, Caribbean and niche vessel operators testified to being unable to spread the stiff port fees across their smaller cargo capacity, while major carriers lobbied in the backroom. Federal Maritime Chairman Louis Sola said the agency also helped the USTR understand the implications, with ultimately all of the maritime regulators’ recommendations being implemented in the latest version. “We put our fingers on the scale to minimize some of the impacts on the industry that were not contemplated in the original proposal,” Sola said in a May 8 interview, stressing that it was an industrywide effort. The revised version exempts Chinese-built ships in US-flag fleets, container ships that are 4,000 TEUs or smaller, voyages of less than 2,000 nautical miles or Chinese-built ships owned by US-based carriers. Per voyage vs. per call Carriers will be levied solely on the first US port calls rather than on each US call, and tonnage taxes are capped at five sailings annually. Equally important, carriers will no longer be penalized come October for having Chinese-built vessels in their fleet — only for the Chinese-built vessels they deploy on US trades. The modification to the tonnage tax plan incentivizes carriers to remove China-built ships from US trades and replace them with vessels constructed in South Korea and Japan. “We do have options, and we are evaluating those options as we speak,” Fabio Santucci, president of US operations for Mediterranean Shipping Co., said at the Georgia International Trade Conference in late April. “Implementation is October, so I really think everybody has plenty of time to adjust and plan.” So far, it looks like MSC will not have to undergo too many changes to accommodate the new fees. Based on current schedules, only two of the nine ships in MSC’s Pearl Shikra service to the US West Coast are Chinese-built — the 9,408-TEU MSC Desiree and the 8,496-TEU MSC Benin. The carrier’s two other trans-Pacific West Coast services primarily use South Korean-built vessels, along with a few Japanese ones. Other carriers, though, may have more work to do to mitigate the fees. Five of the 12 ships currently in the Gemini Cooperation’s US2 service to the US East Coast are Chinese built, with those under long-term charter by Gemini partner Hapag-Lloyd. Bearing a larger brunt Cosco and OOCL don’t have that ability and face tariffs more than twice as large as their peers. The USTR doesn’t mince words on its goal, saying the aim is “to further disincentivize use of Chinese shipping services.” Cosco and OOCL handle the largest share of the trans-Pacific market, accounting for 17% of US import moves from Asia in March, according to PIERS, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within PIERS. The cost of drawing the White House’s ire per TEU is steep. Consultancy Bluspark estimates the tonnage taxes rates rising over the next three years will equate to between $550 and $1,600 per TEU for Chinese operators, compared with a $175 to $400 per TEU ramp-up for carriers not domiciled in China. That could spur Cosco and OOCL to lean on their Ocean Alliance partners CMA CGM and Evergreen Line. In such a scenario, Cosco and OOCL would shift their trans-Pacific vessels to other trades while keeping access to the US market through their vessel sharing agreement with Evergreen and CMA CGM. The easing of US and China tariffs on goods and commodities announced Monday also opens the door for deals in which the tonnage tariff is leveraged for something the Trump administration wants. In the meantime, container lines are already eyeing surcharges and considering how to mitigate the imminent increase in operating costs. “There’s going to be a cost increase somewhere for someone and we will have to assume that there will be reverberations outside of the US as well because everything is connected,” Santucci said. Not all carriers are preparing to impose surcharges tied to USTR, with Maersk telling customers May 8 it didn’t foresee a need for new fees nor a change in its service rotation. Just 5% of Maerk’s global volumes come from China. President Donald Trump’s effort to galvanize US shipbuilding and knock China for subsidizing its own industry may change what ships call the United States, but it doesn’t seem to be denting Chinese shipyard production. Of the 93 container ship orders made to Chinese shipyards this year, 62 have been placed since the February release of the original tariff plan, according to an HSBC investor analysis placed on order since May 8. Contact Mark Szakonyi at mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com . Senior Editor Michael Angell contributed to this column.

North American ports

Revised China tonnage tax less disruptive, still costly

Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Use code MDRW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Wide Box

MEMORIAL DAY SALE

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code MDW25 at checkout to save 25% on the first year of any annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Wide Box

Use code MDW25 at checkout and save 25% on any annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Wide Box

The world of LTL is slow to embrace change. Business anachronisms permeate current supply chain processes. These vestiges of the way things used to work define the LTL freight transportation procurement process of many modern shippers.David Knuth, logistics specialist at IEWC, a global supplier of cable and wire based in Wisconsin, is happy to have modernized the RFP process, automating the entire LTL bidding procedure with Bid$ense, SMC³’s automated truckload and LTL freight transportation sourcing solution. But when prompted, he can still recall what once was.In his previous job, a large part of his duties were consumed by creating an intermodal bid package for carriers. In a spreadsheet, Knuth detailed the company’s volumes lane by lane, taking care to delete any errant keystrokes or misleading data. He would then email out the information to each carrier, taking time to respond to detailed technical questions about the spreadsheet data. Finally, he had to compile all the results, create an algorithm that would compare the carriers on each lane, and award the business.“It was a huge undertaking. It took about four months to do,” Knuth said of the old process. “It was almost a full-time job for that part of the year, every year.”In his new job at IEWC, he sat down with Bid$ense on day one and was amazed at the capabilities. Knuth had never before used a bid tool. SMC³’s latest versions of Bid$ense automate the process even further, taking truckload and LTL RFPs entirely online. The tool draws on RFP best-practices protocols to streamline the bidding communication process, enabling bidding carriers to respond accurately and promptly to shipper requests. The solution also does all the distribution work automatically, electronically submitting shipper bid data to carriers based on their actual service capabilities and performance records. Carriers are alerted with timely prompts for RFP deliverables, so shippers aren’t waiting by the phone for responses.Another benefit of automating the process is the data-cleansing assistance. When Knuth sent spreadsheets to carriers, data errors might cloud the bidding process; he might have to resend data or simply accept a price that did not truly reflect the costs of doing business. Data cleansing is incredibly beneficial, he said.The spreadsheet technique also made bidding analysis an onerous task. Since Bid$ense automates and streamlines the entire RFP process, intensive examination is now simple. SMC³ knows that each bid has more than one best outcome. With uniform responses from each carrier, shippers can quickly rank results and create an unlimited quantity of what-if scenarios to make the optimal procurement decision.Jesse Burnett of Central Garden &amp; Pet experiences many of the same benefits. Founded in 1980, Central Garden &amp; Pet has spent the last three decades growing from a small garden supply company to a provider of a range of products from dog chews and bird seed to soil supplements and natural insecticides. For much of its life, the company shipped these disparate goods via LTL and truckload carriers to retailers throughout the country, relying on each business unit to negotiate directly with their freight transportation providers. This arrangement worked fairly well for a small company, but as Central Garden &amp; Pet expanded, leadership decided to consolidate decision making.Burnett helped centralize the transportation decision making in 2015 with SMC³’s Bid$ense. Before Bid$ense, every business unit operated independently as far as negotiating with carriers.“There were a lot of different things just floating around,” he said. “We didn’t have master agreements in place; no national pricing at all. The pricing from carriers was just all over the place, depending on where you were.”The transformations he saw with Bid$ense were immediate. Burnett has been using the tool about every other year since its implementation at the company. Central Garden and Pet’s $19.6 million 2019 LTL bid saved the company just more than 9 percent when compared to its historical average. For Burnett, though, bid automation extends far beyond savings.“We knew that we weren’t getting the best pricing offer from our carriers just because nothing was centralized,” he continued. “We knew that if we combined everything from all these business units and paired it with one corporate offering, then it would drive some cost benefit with it.”When the company initially decided to centralize bid procurement, executives researched a number of different methodologies and technologies. In the end, though, Burnett found that Bid$ense was both widespread and well known, and that his carrier partners already knew how to use the application. Burnett also highlighted the data-cleansing process as a major benefit, saying the rigorous process ensures that carriers always return the best price.“It definitely has helped drive savings,” he said. “Any time you go out there and you drive that competitiveness with the carriers and they know they’re in a bid environment, it seems to sharpen their pencils.”Transportation procurement is an integral part of the modern supply chain. With Bid$ense, shippers can develop a strategic implementation plan that saves them time and money, but also helps them create strong relationships with their carrier partners. These carriers appreciate the solution’s data-cleansing process; when carriers receive a complete shipment history and future volume forecast, they don’t have to guess on pricing. Carriers that receive more data from shippers get a complete picture of that shipper’s freight, allowing them to accurately plan instead of simply preparing for the worst-case scenario. Clean data presented through an automated system can lead to both bigger shipment savings and a lasting partnership between carrier and customer.Whether customers are looking to streamline over-the-road transportation bidding by automating the RFP process or create an entirely new, centralized sourcing process, Bid$ense has the analytical horsepower to get the job done.SMC³ 2020 Customer Case Study

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

If there’s one immutable truth in the world of logistics, it’s this: LTL is an inherently complex form of transportation. Tariffs, rates, DIM weights, transit times — it’s enough to confuse even seasoned logistics professionals. The solution to this knowledge gap has historically been on-the-job training or university supply chain education, but for a variety of reasons there is now a pressing need for third-party, remote LTL training that prepares logistics workers for transportation success. Global Scope Can Overlook Local Intricacies In the past, professionals looking to move into a supply chain career learned about the basics of supply chain from universities. However, many of these college supply chain programs are now global in scope, focusing on worldwide supply chain management instead of the intricacies of specialized domestic transportation. And even these programs, which used to be widespread, are becoming less common. LTL is not an industry of broad-brush strokes; supply chain professionals really need a pointillistic understanding of the logistics of LTL in order to excel in the industry. Accelerating Need for Dedicated LTL Education This lack of specified training put the onus on employers to prepare new hires with the LTL knowledge needed to do their jobs. Dedicated LTL study is a necessity, not a luxury. At the same time, changes in LTL and the broader supply chain world are accelerating. The reliance on e-commerce has ballooned since the start of the pandemic, and last-mile LTL shipments and related e-commerce strains on the supply chain won’t diminish once social distancing abates. That genie isn’t going back into the bottle. So supply chain employers need logistics workers that are fully versed in all aspects of the industry, ready to solve unique shipping and delivery problems based on their extensive supply chain knowledge But why care about LTL? It’s been reported that some shippers in today’s world are no longer concerned with what mode is used to ship their goods. A Multimodal Approach Ensures On-Time Delivery This mode agnosticism means supply chain stakeholders have to be well versed in all modes of transportation. As unforeseen weather events and other disruptions, such as protests, become more common, savvy logistics employees will need to be armed with familiarity of all modes, not just the most popular, to ensure that freight is delivered on time, without damage, and in the most financially expedient way possible. Offerings like SMC³’s LTL online education courses cover a wide range of topics from LTL basics and operations to more advanced concepts like pricing analytics and transportation law. The company also has plans to continually refresh content, adding new expert presenters and taking the feedback of students to make the courses even better as time goes on. Learn more about&nbsp;<a href="https://logisticstrainingcenter.com/smc3-courses/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">SMC³’s LTL Online Education program</a>&nbsp;and view the 2021 hybrid schedule, featuring live industry experts,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.smc3.com/onlinelearning2021/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">here.</a>

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDW25 at checkout to save 25% on first year of any annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Offer Box

Subscribe Today

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDW25 at checkout and save 25% on any annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Offer Box

MEMORIAL DAY SALE: Use code MDRW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription! 

Upgrade Subscription - Offer Box

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The latest port news from the Journal of Commerce spans the globe from North Carolina and Florida to Shanghai and Singapore. Port news includes port automation, terminal construction projects, the future of decarbonization and net-zero shipping, dredging, port hinterland connectivity, labor, disruption, port congestion and cargo flow.

Drayage

Port infrastructure

Breakbulk ports

Marine terminals

International ports

Longshore labor

Stay informed on port news worldwide with Journal of Commerce. From decarbonization to labor updates, get insights on global developments.

Port News | Journal of Commerce

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology and end-to-end connectivity.

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

News and analysis of ocean containerized cargo movement, logistics, supply chains, technology, and end-to-end connectivity. Maritime news and analysis of containerized ocean cargo movement, breakbulk and roll-on and roll-off shipping from origin to destination.

Latest News

Breakbulk Quarterly

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

More News & Analysis

Norden continues MPV expansion amid ‘strong projected demand’

High-and-heavy shippers sound alarm on rising tariff costs

DAT adds in-house factoring services with latest acquisition