Website_FT_640x340.png

Subscription Sale Pop Up

Events

Maritime

Surface

Air Cargo

Magazine

Supply chain

Breakbulk News

Container Shipping News

Port News

Trucking News

Rail News

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Air Cargo Carriers News

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Logistics Technology News

Cool Cargo News

Last Mile News

Industrial Real Estate News

Special Reports

Breakbulk carriers

Ro/ro cargo

Energy projects

Heavy-haul transport

Project cargo

Container lines

Trans-Atlantic

Forwarding

Asia-Europe

Trans-Pacific

Drayage

Port infrastructure

Breakbulk ports

North American ports

Marine terminals

International ports

Longshore labor

Truckload

Truck brokers

Flatbed

Trucking labor

North-American rail

International rail

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Cross-border carriers lack a load board analogous to the widely-used tools available to drivers on US domestic moves, something the broker and technology provider Forager is attempting to address.
 </div>

Cross-border carriers lack a load board analogous to the widely-used tools available to drivers on US domestic moves, something the broker and technology provider Forager is attempting to address.

3670326_FI.jpg

<div>Cross-border freight technology startup Forager on Tuesday opened a load board for carriers to access loads moving to and from the United States and Canada and Mexico, a move designed to complement its existing freight management tools for shippers.The tool is intended to fill a gap in the market, Forager CEO and co-founder Matt Silver told JOC.com, in that widely used load boards such as DAT Solutions and Truckstop.com have relatively little cross-border activity in terms of North American cross-border moves made via truck. Drivers can find cross-border loads on those boards, but it’s not the most efficient place to...

Cross-border freight technology startup Forager on Tuesday opened a load board for carriers to access loads moving to and from the United States and Canada and Mexico, a move designed to complement its existing freight management tools for shippers. The tool is intended to fill a gap in the market, Forager CEO and co-founder Matt Silver told JOC.com, in that widely used load boards such as DAT Solutions and Truckstop.com have relatively little cross-border activity in terms of North American cross-border moves made via truck. Drivers can find cross-border loads on those boards, but it’s not the most efficient place to do so. Silver’s target is to provide those drivers with a place wholly dedicated to cross-border freight. The Forager load board allows carriers to immediately book a rate on an available load that the Forager system estimates is the market rate for that move, or they can negotiate their own preferred price. Eventually, the board will enable carriers to preset their rates on specific lanes and have the system push loads to them that agree to move on that price. Drivers can also select which border areas in all three countries that they prefer to service, and load board results will eventually filter to prioritize loads in those localities. “Eventually, when we have enough data, the loads that make sense will show up first,” Silver told JOC.com. “We’ll also push notifications to them for matches that really are good for them.” Forager works with a number of large shippers providing what Silver called a marketplace that mixes the model of digitally oriented freight broker Convoy and Truckstop.com for cross-border freight. “We built a [transportation management system] with a marketplace on top of it, and a managed marketplace, not a freewheeling one,” he said. “This was the other half of the vision from day one, to offer a place for carriers to directly book loads.” Brokers typically use load boards to find capacity for shipments from their shipper customers, but Silver said technology is enabling a different way for that transactional procurement to occur, a process often called digital freight matching. Tackling contract freight next Silver’s ambition is to eventually allow carriers to use the board in a non-transactional way given the makeup of cross-border freight. “There is lots of repeat freight that runs via drop and hook,” he said. “Our goal is that contracted freight will eventually come to the load board, so a carrier, instead of coming for a transactional load, can look for long-term lines of business.” In other words, a shipper could post a regular weekly load on the board as opposed to an ad hoc shipment, allowing it and the carrier to lock in a service agreement. “As a shipper, why would you run a bid if you can continually do that?” Silver said. It’s not the first time the company has attempted to enable cross-border shippers to avoid the bid process. In August, Forager added a tool that lets shippers secure instant contract pricing for up to one year, while it said in October it would be transparent with shippers and carriers on the margin it takes on pricing. Silver said Forager doesn’t yet offer trade compliance services for shippers as customers usually use their own customs brokers. He said Forager will eventually integrate with customs brokers and offer a fully integrated solution. DAT offers integrated trade compliance services for cross-border shipments between the US and Canada through an integration with the Singapore-based software provider Global eTrade Services (GeTS). That allows shippers to submit a mandated electronic manifest to US Customs Border and Protection (CBP) and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) prior to arrival. Forager’s load board is an extension of the company’s technology offering, called SCOUT by Forager. SCOUT provides real-time tracking via the visibility provider project44 now powering both sides of the marketplace, SCOUT is the industry’s first and only comprehensive cross-border pricing, tracking, and booking platform for both shippers and carriers. Silver, son of freight brokerage pioneer Jeff Silver, cut his teeth at Coyote Logistics and started Forager in 2018 to solve service gaps in cross-border freight. The company has raised nearly $15 million in venture capital, most recently a $10 million series A round in March 2020. The company competes with fellow early stage cross-border technology providers Nuvocargo and Fr8Hub. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@ihsmarkit.com and follow him on Twitter: @LogTechEric .

Forager launches cross-border load board

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">If the question is solely on the risk related to being delayed in each port, the Gemini network ought to, statistically, have a slightly higher core reliability than Mediterranean Shipping Co. when the need for shuttles is taken into account, writes analyst Lars Jensen.</div>

If the question is solely on the risk related to being delayed in each port, the Gemini network ought to, statistically, have a slightly higher core reliability than Mediterranean Shipping Co. when the need for shuttles is taken into account, writes analyst Lars Jensen.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">As we enter the final months of 2024, there is increased focus on the question of whether the Gemini Cooperation alliance of Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd – launching in February -- can deliver <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/gemini-faces-13-week-phase-in-before-90-reliability-promise-is-tested-clerc-5783839">on its promise of 90% reliability</a>.And running slightly below the surface is the question of whether Mediterranean Shipping Co. (MSC) will be in a better place to deliver reliability given its much larger array of direct services in contrast to Gemini’s hub-centric network. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/5783795_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Ocean Alliance and Premier Alliance are somewhere in between the two outer positions of MSC and Gemini. Of course, time will tell, but what can we foretell from an analytical perspective? To do that, it is instructive to focus on the two extremes represented by MSC and Gemini. The simplest approach is to look at past performance. The problematic issue, obviously, is that the three carriers involved have not operated in these new constellations. However, we can look at the existing 2M Alliance consisting of Maersk and MSC. Across all their alliance services, they had an average on-time performance of 84% in 2019, which was the last “normal” year before the major disruptions presented by the pandemic and Red Sea diversions. Breaking it down to a trade lane level, 2M was 73% on-time on the Pacific head-haul, 92% on Asia to Europe and 74% on the Atlantic westbound trade. 2M was the best-performing alliance on all head-haul trades, with the only exception being the Atlantic where THE Alliance performed better. Hence, at least on Asia-Europe, we have indeed seen 90% performance previously, meaning that a 90% target is not out of reach for carriers intending to do this. Then we come to the core question: Will the hub-focused product of Gemini be more or less prone to delays than MSC’s direct product? First, some simple mathematics. Take a service calling just two ports -- one in Asia and one in Europe. Assume the carrier runs a tight ship (pun intended) and there is only a 2% risk of the vessel getting delayed due to external circumstances such as bad weather. In this case, there is a 2% chance of getting delayed prior to loading in Asia and a 2% chance of getting delayed prior to arriving in Europe, leading to an average reliability of 96% by the time the vessel arrives in Europe. But what if we had two ports in Asia and two ports in Europe? Then the reliability in the last port in Europe would be 92%. With a total of five ports in the rotation, reliability would be 90%. Of course, this is a theoretical approach and does not include the option of a carrier speeding up to get back on schedule or having a buffer of time to use. If we look at the Asia-to-Europe service, Gemini has six ports on all services, except a single service with nine ports. Using the hypothetical 2% risk of delays, this would lead to a Gemini reliability of 89%, except for the one service with many port calls that would be at 83%. For MSC, all but two of their Asia-to-Europe services have 10 to 12 port calls. In the hypothetical of 2% delay risk per port, this would imply a service reliability of 78% to 82%. Hence, from the perspective that each port call is itself a risk factor that can reduce reliability, it is clear that Gemini has a better chance of staying on time throughout the full rotation than MSC. <h3>Direct calls vs. shuttles </h3>Then there is the question of reliability for ports served directly by MSC but via shuttle by Gemini. In this case, there is an added risk that if the Gemini shuttle is not timely, for whichever reason, it further degrades the reliability. Typically, the shuttles call one to two outports apart from the central transshipment hubs. This means an additional one to four ports in the rotation depending on whether a shuttle is needed in both ends or just in a single end. This would bring the port calls for the Maersk network up to seven to 10, implying a reliability of 82% to 87%. This means that if the focus is solely on the risk related to being delayed in each port, the Gemini network ought to, statistically, have a slightly higher core reliability than MSC when the need for shuttles is taken into account. But it also shows that for Gemini to deliver on the promised 90% reliability, the risk of being late in each port – when also taking the shuttles into account – must be less than 2%. In this hypothetical scenario, it would require the Gemini network to operate with only a 1% risk of a vessel getting delayed in each port. But, of course, there are two additional tools that can also be used: having larger buffers to absorb smaller delays and speeding vessels up when necessary. Contact Lars Jensen at lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com.  </div>

As we enter the final months of 2024, there is increased focus on the question of whether the Gemini Cooperation alliance of Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd – launching in February -- can deliver on its promise of 90% reliability . And running slightly below the surface is the question of whether Mediterranean Shipping Co. (MSC) will be in a better place to deliver reliability given its much larger array of direct services in contrast to Gemini’s hub-centric network. Ocean Alliance and Premier Alliance are somewhere in between the two outer positions of MSC and Gemini. Of course, time will tell, but what can we foretell from an analytical perspective? To do that, it is instructive to focus on the two extremes represented by MSC and Gemini. The simplest approach is to look at past performance. The problematic issue, obviously, is that the three carriers involved have not operated in these new constellations. However, we can look at the existing 2M Alliance consisting of Maersk and MSC. Across all their alliance services, they had an average on-time performance of 84% in 2019, which was the last “normal” year before the major disruptions presented by the pandemic and Red Sea diversions. Breaking it down to a trade lane level, 2M was 73% on-time on the Pacific head-haul, 92% on Asia to Europe and 74% on the Atlantic westbound trade. 2M was the best-performing alliance on all head-haul trades, with the only exception being the Atlantic where THE Alliance performed better. Hence, at least on Asia-Europe, we have indeed seen 90% performance previously, meaning that a 90% target is not out of reach for carriers intending to do this. Then we come to the core question: Will the hub-focused product of Gemini be more or less prone to delays than MSC’s direct product? First, some simple mathematics. Take a service calling just two ports -- one in Asia and one in Europe. Assume the carrier runs a tight ship (pun intended) and there is only a 2% risk of the vessel getting delayed due to external circumstances such as bad weather. In this case, there is a 2% chance of getting delayed prior to loading in Asia and a 2% chance of getting delayed prior to arriving in Europe, leading to an average reliability of 96% by the time the vessel arrives in Europe. But what if we had two ports in Asia and two ports in Europe? Then the reliability in the last port in Europe would be 92%. With a total of five ports in the rotation, reliability would be 90%. Of course, this is a theoretical approach and does not include the option of a carrier speeding up to get back on schedule or having a buffer of time to use. If we look at the Asia-to-Europe service, Gemini has six ports on all services, except a single service with nine ports. Using the hypothetical 2% risk of delays, this would lead to a Gemini reliability of 89%, except for the one service with many port calls that would be at 83%. For MSC, all but two of their Asia-to-Europe services have 10 to 12 port calls. In the hypothetical of 2% delay risk per port, this would imply a service reliability of 78% to 82%. Hence, from the perspective that each port call is itself a risk factor that can reduce reliability, it is clear that Gemini has a better chance of staying on time throughout the full rotation than MSC. Direct calls vs. shuttles Then there is the question of reliability for ports served directly by MSC but via shuttle by Gemini. In this case, there is an added risk that if the Gemini shuttle is not timely, for whichever reason, it further degrades the reliability. Typically, the shuttles call one to two outports apart from the central transshipment hubs. This means an additional one to four ports in the rotation depending on whether a shuttle is needed in both ends or just in a single end. This would bring the port calls for the Maersk network up to seven to 10, implying a reliability of 82% to 87%. This means that if the focus is solely on the risk related to being delayed in each port, the Gemini network ought to, statistically, have a slightly higher core reliability than MSC when the need for shuttles is taken into account. But it also shows that for Gemini to deliver on the promised 90% reliability, the risk of being late in each port – when also taking the shuttles into account – must be less than 2%. In this hypothetical scenario, it would require the Gemini network to operate with only a 1% risk of a vessel getting delayed in each port. But, of course, there are two additional tools that can also be used: having larger buffers to absorb smaller delays and speeding vessels up when necessary. Contact Lars Jensen at lars.jensen@vespucci-maritime.com. 

Network realignment shines light on hub-focused product vs. direct calls

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Those companies are combining to get the terminals, talent and technology they need to compete as larger carriers increasingly seek business in their markets. </div>

Those companies are combining to get the terminals, talent and technology they need to compete as larger carriers increasingly seek business in their markets.

<div class="phx-topic">Merger and acquisition activity in the already highly-consolidated US less-than-truckload (LTL) market is picking up speed — not from the top down, but from the bottom up. That could mean new options for shippers trying to find the right home for their LTL freight in a market that has been in flux since <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-ltl-sector-growth-efficiencies-still-fueled-by-loss-of-yellow-5715785">Yellow collapsed in July 2023</a>. While large companies such as TFI International and Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings are <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/interest-in-us-ltl-ma-activity-seen-rising-as-2025-approaches-5772881">talking about LTL acquisitions</a>, small carriers are expanding by acquisition, too. “I think if you’re not growing, you’re sinking,” Mike Moran, president of Moran Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce this week. “If you don’t maintain a certain size and a certain growth rate, you’ll have a hard time competing in this market.” Chicago-based Moran Transportation on Tuesday said it was buying RMX Freight Systems, another small LTL provider, expanding its coverage area, terminals and workforce. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but it adds three states to Moran’s service map, bringing its total number of terminals to 12 and its truck fleet to 675 vehicles. Moran will now have coverage from points in the Dakotas and Missouri in the West to Ohio and points in Kentucky and West Virginia in the East. The Moran-RMX combination is the latest in a string of acquisitions quietly reshaping the lower tier of LTL providers as defined by revenue, further consolidating the sector. Smaller carriers were among the fastest-growing LTL companies in 2023, and acquisitions propelled that growth. CrossCountry Freight Solutions, for example, was ranked 40th among US LTL carriers in 2020, but in <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/journal-of-commerce-rankings-ltl-sector-revenue-drops-despite-yellow-distortion-5199865">2024 rose to 25th place</a> in the Journal of Commerce/SJ Consulting Group rankings thanks to several acquisitions. More recently, DC Logistics acquired the US freight business of GLS, the Netherlands-based parcel carrier, including its LTL assets known as <a href="https://gls-group.com/GROUP/en/GLS-Group-Announces-Strategic-Sale-of-US-Freight-Division-to-DC-Logistics/">Mountain Valley Express</a>. Jack Cooper has expressed interest in purchasing LTL provider <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/standard-forwarding-deal-would-speed-consolidation-among-small-ltl-carriers-5719767">Standard Forwarding</a> from DHL. These companies are combining to get the terminals, talent and technology they need to compete as larger carriers increasingly seek business in regional markets, said Satish Jindel, president of transportation research firm SJ Consulting Group. “As a small carrier, it’s increasingly difficult to have all of the ‘three Ts’ — terminals, talent and technology,” Jindel said. “There are more of these small acquisitions coming.” <h3>Shrinking LTL pool for shippers </h3>Moran believes smaller carriers are part of a value proposition for shippers that is increasingly under threat. “The largest LTL carriers command a sizable chunk of the market,” he said. “I tell my customers that when the big carriers are the last ones left standing, you will pay whatever they want.” And large carriers are <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-ltl-carriers-raising-rates-as-shippers-keep-wary-eye-on-2025-5782152">pressing for rate hikes</a> in 2025. The 40 largest LTL carriers account for 91.8% of total LTL sector revenue of $56.6 billion, according to the Journal of Commerce/SJ Consulting Group rankings. Already, pressure is growing on the smallest LTL carriers to “join or die,” according to Jindel. “Shippers are reducing the number of carriers they work with, and if you have only three or four states in your service area, it’s going to be harder to compete,” he said. Still, that doesn’t mean smaller carriers are the cheaper alternative. “We target customers who demand high-quality service in our market, but we won’t haul for free,” Moran said. “There’s definitely a market for commoditized carriers, but that’s not our world.” With about $50 million in annual revenue this year, Moran Transportation is too small to be ranked among the Journal of Commerce/SJ Consulting Group list of Top 40 LTL carriers, but the company may get there. Moran said he had looked at six to eight potential acquisitions before deciding on RMX. “We’re in acquisition mode,” Moran said. “We’re looking and talking and trying to find the next acquisition to build density in our network and to grow where we want to grow.” Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Merger and acquisition activity in the already highly-consolidated US less-than-truckload (LTL) market is picking up speed — not from the top down, but from the bottom up. That could mean new options for shippers trying to find the right home for their LTL freight in a market that has been in flux since Yellow collapsed in July 2023 . While large companies such as TFI International and Knight-Swift Transportation Holdings are talking about LTL acquisitions , small carriers are expanding by acquisition, too. “I think if you’re not growing, you’re sinking,” Mike Moran, president of Moran Transportation, told the Journal of Commerce this week. “If you don’t maintain a certain size and a certain growth rate, you’ll have a hard time competing in this market.” Chicago-based Moran Transportation on Tuesday said it was buying RMX Freight Systems, another small LTL provider, expanding its coverage area, terminals and workforce. Terms of the deal were not disclosed, but it adds three states to Moran’s service map, bringing its total number of terminals to 12 and its truck fleet to 675 vehicles. Moran will now have coverage from points in the Dakotas and Missouri in the West to Ohio and points in Kentucky and West Virginia in the East. The Moran-RMX combination is the latest in a string of acquisitions quietly reshaping the lower tier of LTL providers as defined by revenue, further consolidating the sector. Smaller carriers were among the fastest-growing LTL companies in 2023, and acquisitions propelled that growth. CrossCountry Freight Solutions, for example, was ranked 40th among US LTL carriers in 2020, but in 2024 rose to 25th place in the Journal of Commerce/SJ Consulting Group rankings thanks to several acquisitions. More recently, DC Logistics acquired the US freight business of GLS, the Netherlands-based parcel carrier, including its LTL assets known as Mountain Valley Express . Jack Cooper has expressed interest in purchasing LTL provider Standard Forwarding from DHL. These companies are combining to get the terminals, talent and technology they need to compete as larger carriers increasingly seek business in regional markets, said Satish Jindel, president of transportation research firm SJ Consulting Group. “As a small carrier, it’s increasingly difficult to have all of the ‘three Ts’ — terminals, talent and technology,” Jindel said. “There are more of these small acquisitions coming.” Shrinking LTL pool for shippers Moran believes smaller carriers are part of a value proposition for shippers that is increasingly under threat. “The largest LTL carriers command a sizable chunk of the market,” he said. “I tell my customers that when the big carriers are the last ones left standing, you will pay whatever they want.” And large carriers are pressing for rate hikes in 2025. The 40 largest LTL carriers account for 91.8% of total LTL sector revenue of $56.6 billion, according to the Journal of Commerce/SJ Consulting Group rankings. Already, pressure is growing on the smallest LTL carriers to “join or die,” according to Jindel. “Shippers are reducing the number of carriers they work with, and if you have only three or four states in your service area, it’s going to be harder to compete,” he said. Still, that doesn’t mean smaller carriers are the cheaper alternative. “We target customers who demand high-quality service in our market, but we won’t haul for free,” Moran said. “There’s definitely a market for commoditized carriers, but that’s not our world.” With about $50 million in annual revenue this year, Moran Transportation is too small to be ranked among the Journal of Commerce/SJ Consulting Group list of Top 40 LTL carriers, but the company may get there. Moran said he had looked at six to eight potential acquisitions before deciding on RMX. “We’re in acquisition mode,” Moran said. “We’re looking and talking and trying to find the next acquisition to build density in our network and to grow where we want to grow.” Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Smaller US LTL carriers increasingly merging in ‘sink or swim’ market

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The new network will have a grace period for about three months as the first full port rotations are completed but must then quickly prove it can raise on-time performance to the promised levels, says Maersk’s CEO.</div>

The new network will have a grace period for about three months as the first full port rotations are completed but must then quickly prove it can raise on-time performance to the promised levels, says Maersk’s CEO.

<div class="phx-topic">Gemini Cooperation will have a 13-week window from Feb. 1 to get the new network up and running before partners Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd come under pressure to prove they can deliver on the promised 90% schedule reliability, according to Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc. Clerc told analysts during <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/maersks-existing-fleet-size-sufficient-to-handle-short-term-demand-growth-ceo-5782669">Maersk’s third-quarter earnings</a> call Thursday he was expecting “an orderly transition” as the carrier moves over to Gemini from the 2M Alliance with Mediterranean Shipping Co. and as Hapag-Lloyd exits THE Alliance. But it will take about three months for the new network to stabilize, the CEO noted. “The longest service we have is a 13-week rotation, so it will take about 13 weeks until the last ship and the full cycle of the service is working on the same network, so from February for three months we will live in a hybrid world,” he said. Once the network is stabilized, Clerc said Gemini will need to quickly demonstrate that it is capable of dramatically improving reliability across its network. “The focus is on quality and the common agreement [with partner Hapag-Lloyd] is that doing it right the first time with high quality is going to be cheaper than operating a network with 50% reliability,” he said. “Our first target is to deliver the proof points to customers. Initially we need to have a successful transition into Gemini. We need to deliver the quality in terms of production cost and production quality that we have promised,” Clerc added. “At some point we will see how much value that creates for customers and how we can participate in that.” <h3>No need to discount or price aggressively </h3>During the startup period, Clerc acknowledged that customers signing with Gemini would not accept higher rate levels based simply on a promise of 90% reliability. But he insisted that the carrier would not have to offer discounts to attract customers to the new network. ”In a market that is as volatile as it is today, with the many disruptions that there are, I don’t think that customers will be willing to pay more for higher reliability without having seen what they’re getting,” Clerc said. ”But I see no reason why, when we’re selling a higher quality and higher reliability, we would have to discount or price more aggressively in order to sign up customers,” he added. February will also see the launch of the Premier Alliance, formerly known as THE Alliance, and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/mscs-global-scale-enables-standalone-network-coverage-5726563">MSC striking off on its own</a> when the 2M Alliance ends. While MSC and the other alliances will focus on providing direct port-to-port services, Gemini will structure its port calls around <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/lofty-reliability-goals-for-gemini-alliance-hang-on-key-service-assumptions-5214653">a “hub-and-spoke” network</a> where Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd control the terminals and the shuttles that will provide onward transport to destination. It is this large transshipment element within the Gemini network that has raised shipper skepticism over the promise of 90% on-time performance, because it typically adds transit time and delays and because, historically, the on-time performance of carriers has been far below that level. Global schedule reliability from January to September this year has been stuck between 50% and 55%, with the average delays for vessels at 5.37 days, according to Sea-Intelligence Maritime Analysis. Maersk’s schedule reliability in September, the most recent data available, was at 55.5% while Hapag-Lloyd had 48.7%. Clerc said teams from Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd conducted exhaustive tests over the past couple of years to determine the efficiency of a hub-and-spoke network before arriving at the 90% reliability figure. “We did not go out with that number lightly,” he said. “The core issue now is to scale this up and then we’ll have to see if there is anything that has not been tested ... but we feel confident we have tested all we could think of in terms of resilience of the product.” Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Gemini Cooperation will have a 13-week window from Feb. 1 to get the new network up and running before partners Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd come under pressure to prove they can deliver on the promised 90% schedule reliability, according to Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc. Clerc told analysts during Maersk’s third-quarter earnings call Thursday he was expecting “an orderly transition” as the carrier moves over to Gemini from the 2M Alliance with Mediterranean Shipping Co. and as Hapag-Lloyd exits THE Alliance. But it will take about three months for the new network to stabilize, the CEO noted. “The longest service we have is a 13-week rotation, so it will take about 13 weeks until the last ship and the full cycle of the service is working on the same network, so from February for three months we will live in a hybrid world,” he said. Once the network is stabilized, Clerc said Gemini will need to quickly demonstrate that it is capable of dramatically improving reliability across its network. “The focus is on quality and the common agreement [with partner Hapag-Lloyd] is that doing it right the first time with high quality is going to be cheaper than operating a network with 50% reliability,” he said. “Our first target is to deliver the proof points to customers. Initially we need to have a successful transition into Gemini. We need to deliver the quality in terms of production cost and production quality that we have promised,” Clerc added. “At some point we will see how much value that creates for customers and how we can participate in that.” No need to discount or price aggressively During the startup period, Clerc acknowledged that customers signing with Gemini would not accept higher rate levels based simply on a promise of 90% reliability. But he insisted that the carrier would not have to offer discounts to attract customers to the new network. ”In a market that is as volatile as it is today, with the many disruptions that there are, I don’t think that customers will be willing to pay more for higher reliability without having seen what they’re getting,” Clerc said. ”But I see no reason why, when we’re selling a higher quality and higher reliability, we would have to discount or price more aggressively in order to sign up customers,” he added. February will also see the launch of the Premier Alliance, formerly known as THE Alliance, and MSC striking off on its own when the 2M Alliance ends. While MSC and the other alliances will focus on providing direct port-to-port services, Gemini will structure its port calls around a “hub-and-spoke” network where Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd control the terminals and the shuttles that will provide onward transport to destination. It is this large transshipment element within the Gemini network that has raised shipper skepticism over the promise of 90% on-time performance, because it typically adds transit time and delays and because, historically, the on-time performance of carriers has been far below that level. Global schedule reliability from January to September this year has been stuck between 50% and 55%, with the average delays for vessels at 5.37 days, according to Sea-Intelligence Maritime Analysis. Maersk’s schedule reliability in September, the most recent data available, was at 55.5% while Hapag-Lloyd had 48.7%. Clerc said teams from Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd conducted exhaustive tests over the past couple of years to determine the efficiency of a hub-and-spoke network before arriving at the 90% reliability figure. “We did not go out with that number lightly,” he said. “The core issue now is to scale this up and then we’ll have to see if there is anything that has not been tested ... but we feel confident we have tested all we could think of in terms of resilience of the product.” Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Gemini faces 13-week phase-in before 90% reliability promise is tested: Clerc

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The gains suggest Hub benefited from an aggressive pricing posture in bids that went live earlier this year, reversing some of its market share loss in 2023 by offering attractive rates to shippers.</div>

The gains suggest Hub benefited from an aggressive pricing posture in bids that went live earlier this year, reversing some of its market share loss in 2023 by offering attractive rates to shippers.

<div class="phx-topic">Hub Group experienced double-digit growth in its intermodal volumes for the third quarter, but cautioned that a frontloaded peak season may lead to a softer finish to the year. It comes as the bid season begins in earnest, with shippers aiming to hold rates steady while intermodal carriers seek modest rate increases for 2025. The second-largest North American intermodal provider on Wednesday reported a 12% increase in intermodal volume in the third quarter compared with the year-ago period, although revenue per load declined 16%. The Intermodal Association of North America (IANA) said total intermodal volumes in North America rose 6% year over year in the third quarter. Hub’s results suggest it benefited from an <a href="https://word-edit.officeapps.live.com/we/il-share-while-schneiders-q2-volume-stays-flat-5703104">aggressive pricing posture</a> in bids that went live earlier this year, reversing some of its market share loss in 2023 by offering attractive rates to shippers. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="3be84174-0ae7-4dbf-bd93-969d716de272"></dynamic-object></div>Phil Yeager, chief executive of Hub Group, attributed some of the Q3 volume increase to shippers frontloading cargo to avoid the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ila-usmx-agree-on-new-wage-offer-and-contract-extension-that-reopens-ports-5741882">labor unrest on the East Coast</a>. He also said the peak season has resembled a normal pre-pandemic peak that will taper off in the next few weeks. “October was strong with a 12% increase in volume, but with the rest of the [fourth] quarter, we think the pull forward has eaten into some of our original expectations for volume,” Yeager said on an earnings call Wednesday. Rival intermodal provider J.B. Hunt said earlier in October that frontloading was a factor in rising volumes, but was unclear how much it would impact the full fourth quarter. The Journal of Commerce forecasts North American railroads will haul a total of 2 million to 2.2 million domestic containers in the fourth quarter, compared with 2.1 million last year. <h3>Bid season ramps up </h3>Shippers have begun soliciting contract rates for 2025 that would typically start between January and April and run for 12 months. Shippers want to roll over current low rates into next year, while intermodal carriers are looking for an increase in rates, according to conversations the Journal of Commerce has had with parties on both sides. Shippers have secured intermodal rate reductions for two consecutive years after double-digit hikes in 2021 and 2022. “It’s still a competitive rate environment, but we’re not seeing anything that’s irrational,” Yeager said. “Everyone wants to get their assets moving, but I think [providers] want to steer prices upwards. We’re not anticipating, as we go into bid season, that prices will go down. It’s unknown how much they’ll go up.” Trucking rates, as a leading indicator, will be critical in determining how much intermodal rates could rise in 2025. Trucking analysts and executives at the Journal of Commerce Inland Distribution Conference in October forecast that truckload rates would rise by <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/domestic-intermodal-rate-pressure-building-on-stronger-truck-pricing-5741060">low- to mid-single digits</a> in early 2025 contracts, with intermodal rates a couple of percentage points lower than that. Nevertheless, Hub Group’s truck brokerage division is expected to remain pressured by prices in the fourth quarter, casting doubt on whether truckload carriers have much leverage as rate talks with shippers proceed. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Hub Group experienced double-digit growth in its intermodal volumes for the third quarter, but cautioned that a frontloaded peak season may lead to a softer finish to the year. It comes as the bid season begins in earnest, with shippers aiming to hold rates steady while intermodal carriers seek modest rate increases for 2025. The second-largest North American intermodal provider on Wednesday reported a 12% increase in intermodal volume in the third quarter compared with the year-ago period, although revenue per load declined 16%. The Intermodal Association of North America (IANA) said total intermodal volumes in North America rose 6% year over year in the third quarter. Hub’s results suggest it benefited from an aggressive pricing posture in bids that went live earlier this year, reversing some of its market share loss in 2023 by offering attractive rates to shippers. Phil Yeager, chief executive of Hub Group, attributed some of the Q3 volume increase to shippers frontloading cargo to avoid the labor unrest on the East Coast . He also said the peak season has resembled a normal pre-pandemic peak that will taper off in the next few weeks. “October was strong with a 12% increase in volume, but with the rest of the [fourth] quarter, we think the pull forward has eaten into some of our original expectations for volume,” Yeager said on an earnings call Wednesday. Rival intermodal provider J.B. Hunt said earlier in October that frontloading was a factor in rising volumes, but was unclear how much it would impact the full fourth quarter. The Journal of Commerce forecasts North American railroads will haul a total of 2 million to 2.2 million domestic containers in the fourth quarter, compared with 2.1 million last year. Bid season ramps up Shippers have begun soliciting contract rates for 2025 that would typically start between January and April and run for 12 months. Shippers want to roll over current low rates into next year, while intermodal carriers are looking for an increase in rates, according to conversations the Journal of Commerce has had with parties on both sides. Shippers have secured intermodal rate reductions for two consecutive years after double-digit hikes in 2021 and 2022. “It’s still a competitive rate environment, but we’re not seeing anything that’s irrational,” Yeager said. “Everyone wants to get their assets moving, but I think [providers] want to steer prices upwards. We’re not anticipating, as we go into bid season, that prices will go down. It’s unknown how much they’ll go up.” Trucking rates, as a leading indicator, will be critical in determining how much intermodal rates could rise in 2025. Trucking analysts and executives at the Journal of Commerce Inland Distribution Conference in October forecast that truckload rates would rise by low- to mid-single digits in early 2025 contracts, with intermodal rates a couple of percentage points lower than that. Nevertheless, Hub Group’s truck brokerage division is expected to remain pressured by prices in the fourth quarter, casting doubt on whether truckload carriers have much leverage as rate talks with shippers proceed. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Hub Group’s Q3 intermodal volumes jump amid cargo frontloading

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Viau and Maisonneuve marine terminals closed to ship, rail and truck traffic Thursday morning as members of the Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 375, which represents 1,200 dockworkers at Montreal, walked off the job. </div>

The Viau and Maisonneuve marine terminals closed to ship, rail and truck traffic Thursday morning as members of the Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 375, which represents 1,200 dockworkers at Montreal, walked off the job.

<div class="phx-topic">The Port of Montreal is warning that shippers may face diverted cargoes as an indefinite strike began Thursday at two marine terminals handling Mediterranean Shipping Co. container services, with over two dozen vessels facing an impact depending on the length of the current work stoppage. The Viau and Maisonneuve marine terminals operated by Termont International closed to ship, rail and truck traffic Thursday morning as <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/montreal-dockworkers-target-mscs-terminals-for-strike-this-week-5781453">members of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Local 375, which represents 1,200 dockworkers at Montreal, walked off the job</a>. Montreal Port Authority (MPA) Chief Executive Julie Gascon said in a statement Thursday that the shutdown “undermines the reliability and image of our logistics sector.” The open-ended strike follows <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/port-of-montreal-to-face-three-day-strike-against-two-terminals-next-week-5737483">a three-day, port-wide work stoppage</a> at the start of October, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/montreal-dockworkers-to-refuse-overtime-in-latest-salvo-against-port-employers-5745362">a boycott of overtime work</a> and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/montreal-dockworkers-plan-one-day-port-strike-on-sunday-5773614">another port-wide strike this past Sunday</a>. “This new work stoppage at the Viau and Maisonneuve terminals, at the very hub of our supply chain, can only have a deeply negative impact on thousands of local businesses, as well as on the economy of Quebec and Canada as a whole,” Gascon said. Montreal’s two other international container terminals remain open. The strike at the two terminals will idle more than 1 million TEUs of Montreal’s total 2.3 million TEUs in terminal capacity. The MPA said five ships with combined capacity of 18,000 TEUs are currently headed for the two terminals, with those ships carrying time-sensitive pharmaceutical and medical goods. Refrigerated containers holding such goods are already backlogged at the port due to the earlier labor actions, the MPA said, adding that some scheduled outbound rail service has been canceled due to the backlog. Over the next three weeks, 26 ships are scheduled to call the two terminals, with the MPA saying that vessels “could change their port of destination” due to the strike. “It is imperative that the parties reach an agreement,” Gascon said. “The need to reach an agreement quickly is acute and cannot be ignored.” MSC, whose terminal arm jointly owns and operates Termont International, said in a customer advisory Wednesday that it is “working to minimize disruptions to our customers’ supply chains” and that “vessel impacts will be communicated as available and relevant.” The Maritime Employers Association (MEA), which represents Montreal’s terminals and stevedores, said Thursday it “deplores” the strike. The MEA and Local 375 have been in protracted negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement since the last one expired at the end of 2023. The MEA said in its statement that Local 375 has made a demand to change work hours without formal negotiations. It said that “schedules used on the different docks ... called into question by the union in recent days, are enshrined in the collective agreement in force and cannot be used as a bargaining chip for a strike targeting a single operator, as is the case today.” The CUPE did not respond to a request for comment. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

The Port of Montreal is warning that shippers may face diverted cargoes as an indefinite strike began Thursday at two marine terminals handling Mediterranean Shipping Co. container services, with over two dozen vessels facing an impact depending on the length of the current work stoppage. The Viau and Maisonneuve marine terminals operated by Termont International closed to ship, rail and truck traffic Thursday morning as members of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Local 375, which represents 1,200 dockworkers at Montreal, walked off the job . Montreal Port Authority (MPA) Chief Executive Julie Gascon said in a statement Thursday that the shutdown “undermines the reliability and image of our logistics sector.” The open-ended strike follows a three-day, port-wide work stoppage at the start of October, a boycott of overtime work and another port-wide strike this past Sunday . “This new work stoppage at the Viau and Maisonneuve terminals, at the very hub of our supply chain, can only have a deeply negative impact on thousands of local businesses, as well as on the economy of Quebec and Canada as a whole,” Gascon said. Montreal’s two other international container terminals remain open. The strike at the two terminals will idle more than 1 million TEUs of Montreal’s total 2.3 million TEUs in terminal capacity. The MPA said five ships with combined capacity of 18,000 TEUs are currently headed for the two terminals, with those ships carrying time-sensitive pharmaceutical and medical goods. Refrigerated containers holding such goods are already backlogged at the port due to the earlier labor actions, the MPA said, adding that some scheduled outbound rail service has been canceled due to the backlog. Over the next three weeks, 26 ships are scheduled to call the two terminals, with the MPA saying that vessels “could change their port of destination” due to the strike. “It is imperative that the parties reach an agreement,” Gascon said. “The need to reach an agreement quickly is acute and cannot be ignored.” MSC, whose terminal arm jointly owns and operates Termont International, said in a customer advisory Wednesday that it is “working to minimize disruptions to our customers’ supply chains” and that “vessel impacts will be communicated as available and relevant.” The Maritime Employers Association (MEA), which represents Montreal’s terminals and stevedores, said Thursday it “deplores” the strike. The MEA and Local 375 have been in protracted negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement since the last one expired at the end of 2023. The MEA said in its statement that Local 375 has made a demand to change work hours without formal negotiations. It said that “schedules used on the different docks ... called into question by the union in recent days, are enshrined in the collective agreement in force and cannot be used as a bargaining chip for a strike targeting a single operator, as is the case today.” The CUPE did not respond to a request for comment. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Montreal warns of vessel diversions as strike against MSC terminals begins

Subscribe today and save 25%
Use code FSSW25 at checkout
Valid for first year of subscription

Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Wide Box

FALL SALE

Upgrade to Gold today for just $695
Use code FSUW695 at checkout
Valid for first year of subscription

Upgrade Subscription - Wide Box

Subscribe today and save 25%!
Use code FSSW25 at checkout
Valid for first year of subscription

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Wide Box

Register today to redeem your Gold subscriber discount!

TPM Discount - Gold

Save 20% on TPM25

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

FALL SALE: Use code FSSW25 and save 25% on any annual subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous - Offer Box

Subscribe Today

FALL SALE: Use code FSUW695 and upgrade to a Gold subscription today for just $695!

Upgrade Subscription - Offer Box

Upgrade Subscription

FALL SALE: Use code FSSW25 and save 25% on annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - Free Trials - Offer Box

20% OFF ON TPM25: Register today and redeem your Gold subscriber discount!

TPM Discount - Gold 

20% OFF ON TPM25

The premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM25

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

The only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk25

Explore today’s cutting-edge global logistics technology news and analysis by the Journal of Commerce. Coverage includes logistics technology startups, logistics technology solutions, venture capital, management and impact, freight forwarder technology and the latest supply chain and logistics technology.

Our logistics technology news include logistics technology startups, solutions, and the impact of technology on logistics and supply chain management.

Logistics Technology News | Journal of Commerce

The Journal of Commerce’s supply chain news and analysis impacting the management of end-to-end supply chains reports on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends, sourcing, customs certification and contract logistics. Supply chain news coverage also delves into refrigerated shipping advancements and management of inventory status, regulatory updates and government funding projects.

Stay informed with the latest regulation news and trade updates. Explore comprehensive transportation news and trade regulations today.

Transport, Trade and Regulation News | Journal of Commerce

A thorough cool cargoes news by Journal of Commerce. Learn about the latest trends in refrigerated cargo transportation, weight capacity, technology, and more.

Cool Cargoes News | Journal of Commerce

Journal of Commerce keeps you informed on the latest last mile news with comprehensive coverage of carriers, logistics, and last mile transportation solutions.

Last Mile News | Journal of Commerce

Discover the latest industrial real estate news and trends. Covering projects, real estate supply chain, logistics, pricing, cross dock facilities, and more.

Industrial Real Estate News | Journal of Commerce

Stay updated on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends and more with our comprehensive supply chain news and analysis.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Network realignment shines light on hub-focused product vs. direct calls

Smaller US LTL carriers increasingly merging in ‘sink or swim’ market

Gemini faces 13-week phase-in before 90% reliability promise is tested: Clerc