Four shipping alliances — groups of shipping companies functioning as single organizations regarding cargo shipments — transport 96 percent of all the containerized cargo that moves daily on the world’s high seas. There is no competition inside that alliance group, and very little with the other three.
One might ask, where is the antitrust division of the Department of Justice whose interest is supposed to make certain there is competition in business in the United States?
Today’s results are ship lines crying that rates are too low. Potential layups of ships are rumored. And yet these same “losers” are ordering more new giant ships, 18,000 to 22,000 TEUs each with more than 100 due to be delivered in next 18 months. No one asks how many ports are capable of accommodating these giants.
Shipowner attitudes appear to be one of defiance to terminal operators, to seaports and their government regulators. As soon as a ship docks at a convenient port, discharge of the containers is underway, frequently with very little order in mind. One government official at the recent maritime conference in Guangzhou described today’s ship discharge as “creating chaos in a port” or “dumping” the freight.
When shipping lines functioned individually and as a member of a conference, U.S. government agencies rode herd on the conferences to make certain members played “fair.” Today four giant alliances control the containers moving on the world seas and on world ports, without any overseers.
What will happen when only two alliances are left? Will they still report losses? Will the carriers return to the tradition of participating in infrastructure problems at the ports? Or will the alliance be able to remain defiant by forcing the port(s) to serve the lines at any cost?