<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Gaza International Airport, inaugurated in November 1998 by Yasser Arafat as the gateway to a future</div>

Gaza International Airport, inaugurated in November 1998 by Yasser Arafat as the gateway to a future

<div>Gaza International Airport, inaugurated in November 1998 by Yasser Arafat as the gateway to a future Palestinian state, will soon get an air-cargo terminal - with help likely coming from a Tel Aviv-based contractor eager to exploit the growing business ties between Israelis and Palestinians.Compared with other airports in the Arab world, the $100 million airport, located at the southern end of the dusty, crowded Gaza Strip near the Egyptian border, is a small player - despite its Islamic-inspired architecture and the intense publicity surrounding its opening.According to Tawfik al-Hourani, the airport's head of international relations, Gaza handled only 90,000...

Gaza International Airport, inaugurated in November 1998 by Yasser Arafat as the gateway to a future Palestinian state, will soon get an air-cargo terminal - with help likely coming from a Tel Aviv-based contractor eager to exploit the growing business ties between Israelis and Palestinians. Compared with other airports in the Arab world, the $100 million airport, located at the southern end of the dusty, crowded Gaza Strip near the Egyptian border, is a small player - despite its Islamic-inspired architecture and the intense publicity surrounding its opening.According to Tawfik al-Hourani, the airport's head of international relations, Gaza handled only 90,000 passengers and 117 tons of cargo in 1999. ''We're talking about very small cargo operations,'' al-Hourani said in an interview at the airport last month. ''The main problem we have is Israeli security. We hope not to see any Israeli (soldiers) here in the future. Palestinians should have the right to fly anywhere they want.'' At the moment, Gaza Airport's main client is Palestinian Airlines, which owns only three aircraft: one Boeing 727-200 donated by Saudi Prince Walid bin-Talal, and two Fokker-50s donated by the Dutch government. ''For the time being, we're using the Boeing for cargo since we don't have any dedicated cargo jets,'' said al-Hourani. Palestinian Airways currently flies to Cairo; Amman; Doha, Qatar; Dubai; Larnaca, Cyprus; and Jedda, Saudi Arabia. The airport also receives flights from Royal Air Maroc, Egyptair, Tarom and Royal Jordanian. Rajaie Daoudi, vice president of Palestinian Airlines, said his company has signed an agreement with Royal Jordanian, which has agreed to carry Palestinian cargo from Amman to 43 destinations worldwide. TRAVEL, SHIPPING EASIER There is no question that, beyond the airport's role as a symbol of Palestinian sovereignty, it has made life easier for Palestinians seeking to travel abroad, since they no longer have to obtain permits to enter Israel in order to use Tel Aviv's Ben-Gurion Airport. In addition, Gaza International opens up new possibilities for importing and exporting goods to and from nearby Arab countries, without expensive and time-consuming shipment via Israel. Yet planes flying the blue-and-white colors of Israel's flag carrier, El Al, are nowhere to be seen at this airport - not because the Palestinians don't want El Al here, but because Gaza is strictly off-limits to both Israeli travelers and exporters. ISRAEL BANS USE ''The Israeli government has prohibited its citizens from using this airport - a decision made by the Netanyahu administration - because this airport is cheaper than Ben-Gurion,'' claims al-Hourani. ''Everything is cheaper here - labor, land, even the cost of the aircraft. There were many demands from Israeli businessmen to use this airport for cargo, but their government said no,'' al-Hourani said. Pini Schiff, spokesman for the Israel Airport Authority, denies the ban on Israeli passengers and cargo at Gaza is a protectionist measure. ''It's not a law, it's a decision taken by the former minister of defense. It has nothing to do with business.'' Adds Avner Yarkoni, director-general of Israel's Civil Aviation Administration: ''At the moment, it's prohibited - because of security reasons - for Israelis to use Gaza. Of course, there's a possibility this will change as relations develop between Israel and the Palestinians. Regarding cargo, it makes sense that it's cheaper, but nobody's putting pressure on me yet. I think the Israelis understand the situation. They're patient.'' That patience may yet pay off. In March, the European Union announced that it would invest $26 million to build an air-cargo terminal at Gaza International. The EU isn't giving the Palestinians the money, but is instead publishing an international tender so that the terminal - which must be capable of transporting 60,000 metric tons of freight per year - will be established as a completed work and as a European interest. MAMAN INTERESTED According to Tel Aviv daily Ha'aretz, Israel's Maman freight and unloading company hopes to win that tender, and is now in ''advanced negotiations'' with the Palestinian Authority not only on constructing the terminal, but also on possible Israeli-Palestinian collaboration in fields such as supplying data, guidance and strategic planning. ''We have the clear advantage of a connection with the Palestinians, both in building the terminal and in its operation by the Palestinians,'' Nehama Ronen, chairman of Maman, told Ha'aretz. ''First, a Palestinian commercial terminal, at least in the first years, will have to be dependent on Israeli industry. That's why the ability to control what goes in and out of the terminal is very important. In a period of peace, Israeli exports will have a niche in the Gulf and other Arab states via the Palestinian terminal,'' he said. Maman currently handles 300,000 tons of cargo per year, said Ronen. In addition to Gaza, the Palestinian Authority is planning a second airfield, to be located somewhere in the West Bank. The exact location hasn't been determined, but it would likely be near Jericho or Bethlehem, and would probably be geared more toward passenger than cargo traffic. Under terms of the peace accord signed between Israel and the Palestinians in 1994, any venue would need to be worked out in discussions with Israel or face a veto. For now, government-owned El Al said it isn't interested in Gaza Airport from a cargo standpoint, though from a passenger point of view it might be profitable. SAVINGS VS. SECURITY Despite the obvious security concerns Israelis might have flying to and from an airport inaugurated by Yasser Arafat - whose PLO was involved in dozens of airline hijackings and other terrorist attacks during the 1970s and 80s - cheaper airline tickets to their favorite European and Mideast destinations might sway them. Whether El Al planes will ever take off or land at Gaza ''depends on reciprocity, if Palestinian Airlines would be authorized to fly to Ben-Gurion,'' said Yarkoni. ''It takes time, but things are moving in this direction.''

Air Cargo

PALESTINIANS PLAN CARGO TERMINAL AT GAZA AIRPORT

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Container lines offering regular calls at India’s busiest port have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic.</div>

Container lines offering regular calls at India’s busiest port have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Mundra Port – India’s busiest container handler – is grappling with major harbor congestion that has severely disrupted the flow of cargo to and from northern hinterlands by rail. Rail freight accounts for a significant portion of box volumes handled by Mundra, with northern inland container depots (ICDs) contributing the most. Container lines offering regular calls at Mundra have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic. “Due to congestion, train movement towards Mundra Port is currently disrupted,” Maersk said in a customer advisory. “This is affecting the timely placement of export trains at the port and, consequently, causing delays in the evacuation of import containers.” The import backlogs have choked rail yards, complicating the typically followed first-in, first-out (FIFO) model of train operations, sources said. Concerns among local supply chain stakeholders are growing, with freight depot service leader Gateway Distriparks (GDL) sending out a trade advisory to customers. ”Train movement towards the port [Mundra] is currently sluggish,” GDL noted. “We are in regular touch with Indian Railways to expedite train movement.” Officials at India’s Association of Container Train Operators (ACTO) who spoke with the Journal of Commerce have attributed the rail slowdowns to chronic capacity pressure at Mundra stemming from landside infrastructure gaps amid steady trade growth. “There is a critical need for port rail capacity to increase with more handling lines and evacuation capacity in order to deal with the growing volumes,” said ACTO President Manish Puri. “This is the only long-term solution, otherwise congestion will keep occurring whenever there is even a minor volume peak or other operational hiccup due to external factors.” <h3>Terminals, train operators at odds </h3>As shippers face additional cost implications, a blame game over the cargo buildups appears to be at play between port terminals and container train operators (CTOs), including state-owned giant Container Corporation of India (Concor). “We are not denying the increased pressure from import surges, but CTOs stick to their normal business approach on the export leg – wait until trains are completely full to dispatch,” said a port executive who didn’t want to be identified. Sunil Vaswani, executive director of the Container Shipping Lines’ Association (India), said the issue needs fixing between terminals and CTOs, adding that a shortage of truck drivers linked to the festive season and lingering vessel bunching cases have exacerbated the problem. Mundra is equipped to handle up to 30 trains a day, generally railing out between 5,000 TEUs to 6,000 TEUs daily. But the normal inventory of import containers landing into its yards is in the range of 15,000 TEUs, which sources said has peaked at 20,000 TEUs in recent days. Mundra -- Adani Ports’ flagship port entity – features five box terminals, which have had 90%-plus utilization of existing capacity levels for some time because of strong cargo growth. But the pace of volumes passing through rival Nhava Sheva Port has ticked noticeably higher over the past few months following the recent launch of Phase II operations by concessionaire PSA International, pushing overall port capacity to about 10 million TEUs. The latest port data reflects that altering regional trend. April-August volumes at Nhava Sheva were up 13% year over year to 3.3 million TEUs, while Mundra remained relatively flat at 3.5 million TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at <a href="mailto:bencyvmathew@gmail.com">bencyvmathew@gmail.com.</a></div>

Mundra Port – India’s busiest container handler – is grappling with major harbor congestion that has severely disrupted the flow of cargo to and from northern hinterlands by rail. Rail freight accounts for a significant portion of box volumes handled by Mundra, with northern inland container depots (ICDs) contributing the most. Container lines offering regular calls at Mundra have told customers the landside logjam is causing considerable supply chain risks for the trade as train turnarounds remain increasingly chaotic. “Due to congestion, train movement towards Mundra Port is currently disrupted,” Maersk said in a customer advisory. “This is affecting the timely placement of export trains at the port and, consequently, causing delays in the evacuation of import containers.” The import backlogs have choked rail yards, complicating the typically followed first-in, first-out (FIFO) model of train operations, sources said. Concerns among local supply chain stakeholders are growing, with freight depot service leader Gateway Distriparks (GDL) sending out a trade advisory to customers. ”Train movement towards the port [Mundra] is currently sluggish,” GDL noted. “We are in regular touch with Indian Railways to expedite train movement.” Officials at India’s Association of Container Train Operators (ACTO) who spoke with the Journal of Commerce have attributed the rail slowdowns to chronic capacity pressure at Mundra stemming from landside infrastructure gaps amid steady trade growth. “There is a critical need for port rail capacity to increase with more handling lines and evacuation capacity in order to deal with the growing volumes,” said ACTO President Manish Puri. “This is the only long-term solution, otherwise congestion will keep occurring whenever there is even a minor volume peak or other operational hiccup due to external factors.” Terminals, train operators at odds As shippers face additional cost implications, a blame game over the cargo buildups appears to be at play between port terminals and container train operators (CTOs), including state-owned giant Container Corporation of India (Concor). “We are not denying the increased pressure from import surges, but CTOs stick to their normal business approach on the export leg – wait until trains are completely full to dispatch,” said a port executive who didn’t want to be identified. Sunil Vaswani, executive director of the Container Shipping Lines’ Association (India), said the issue needs fixing between terminals and CTOs, adding that a shortage of truck drivers linked to the festive season and lingering vessel bunching cases have exacerbated the problem. Mundra is equipped to handle up to 30 trains a day, generally railing out between 5,000 TEUs to 6,000 TEUs daily. But the normal inventory of import containers landing into its yards is in the range of 15,000 TEUs, which sources said has peaked at 20,000 TEUs in recent days. Mundra -- Adani Ports’ flagship port entity – features five box terminals, which have had 90%-plus utilization of existing capacity levels for some time because of strong cargo growth. But the pace of volumes passing through rival Nhava Sheva Port has ticked noticeably higher over the past few months following the recent launch of Phase II operations by concessionaire PSA International, pushing overall port capacity to about 10 million TEUs. The latest port data reflects that altering regional trend. April-August volumes at Nhava Sheva were up 13% year over year to 3.3 million TEUs, while Mundra remained relatively flat at 3.5 million TEUs. Contact Bency Mathew at bencyvmathew@gmail.com.

Container Shipping News

Port News

International ports

Container lines

Port infrastructure

Maritime

Congestion choking Mundra Port threatens North India cargo flow

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Knight-Swift already partners with both UP and NS, so a combined transcontinental railroad would fit nicely into its existing service for shippers.</div>

Knight-Swift already partners with both UP and NS, so a combined transcontinental railroad would fit nicely into its existing service for shippers.

<div class="phx-topic">Knight-Swift Transportation said Tuesday it believes US regulators should approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), becoming the fourth major intermodal provider to publicly back the $85 billion deal. Swift Intermodal, Knight-Swift’s intermodal division, already partners with both UP and NS, making the acquisition a natural fit for its existing intermodal network. A combined transcontinental railroad would require little to no adjustment for Swift, and it could reap the rewards of eliminating time-consuming interchanges in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans. “By knitting together a coast-to-coast rail network, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are creating new efficiencies that will benefit everyone — from logistics providers like us to our customers, to the end-consumers,” Knight-Swift CEO Adam Miller said in a statement. “As a company that operates thousands of trucks and thousands of intermodal containers, we know the power of combining modes. This unified rail system will let us seamlessly integrate our trucking with rail on cross-country shipments like never before.” Knight-Swift’s intermodal division owns about 12,000 containers, hauling nearly 150,000 loads across all North American railroads annually. It is the fifth-largest asset-owning intermodal provider in the US behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics. Knight-Swift joins <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-ns-deal-would-trigger-unnecessary-wave-of-rail-mergers-cpkc-6069870">C.R. England, Hub Group, and Mode Transportation</a> as supporters of the UP-NS deal, which would create the US’ first transcontinental railroad and requires approval from the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), which could come sometime in 2027. <h3>Political football </h3>While UP and NS have until January to file their formal application to the STB, the railroads received a boost last week when the Trump administration moved to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trump-move-to-oust-stbs-primus-boosts-likelihood-of-up-ns-approval-6070952">fire board member</a> Robert Primus, who has been vocal in his opposition to consolidation in the rail industry. The Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation Union and its transportation division (SMART-TD), has come out against the UP-NS transaction and criticized the attempted removal of Primus. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), another large rail union, has not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) opposes the deal and last week ruled out a potential merger with the other eastern US railroad, CSX Transportation. Canadian National Railway has not commented publicly on the UP-NS deal. Schneider National and STG Logistics, two other large asset-based partners of UP, have not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Both partner with CSX in the eastern US, making a UP-NS transcontinental railroad more complicated for their intermodal networks. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Knight-Swift Transportation said Tuesday it believes US regulators should approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), becoming the fourth major intermodal provider to publicly back the $85 billion deal. Swift Intermodal, Knight-Swift’s intermodal division, already partners with both UP and NS, making the acquisition a natural fit for its existing intermodal network. A combined transcontinental railroad would require little to no adjustment for Swift, and it could reap the rewards of eliminating time-consuming interchanges in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans. “By knitting together a coast-to-coast rail network, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are creating new efficiencies that will benefit everyone — from logistics providers like us to our customers, to the end-consumers,” Knight-Swift CEO Adam Miller said in a statement. “As a company that operates thousands of trucks and thousands of intermodal containers, we know the power of combining modes. This unified rail system will let us seamlessly integrate our trucking with rail on cross-country shipments like never before.” Knight-Swift’s intermodal division owns about 12,000 containers, hauling nearly 150,000 loads across all North American railroads annually. It is the fifth-largest asset-owning intermodal provider in the US behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics. Knight-Swift joins C.R. England, Hub Group, and Mode Transportation as supporters of the UP-NS deal, which would create the US’ first transcontinental railroad and requires approval from the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), which could come sometime in 2027. Political football While UP and NS have until January to file their formal application to the STB, the railroads received a boost last week when the Trump administration moved to fire board member Robert Primus, who has been vocal in his opposition to consolidation in the rail industry. The Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation Union and its transportation division (SMART-TD), has come out against the UP-NS transaction and criticized the attempted removal of Primus. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), another large rail union, has not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) opposes the deal and last week ruled out a potential merger with the other eastern US railroad, CSX Transportation. Canadian National Railway has not commented publicly on the UP-NS deal. Schneider National and STG Logistics, two other large asset-based partners of UP, have not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Both partner with CSX in the eastern US, making a UP-NS transcontinental railroad more complicated for their intermodal networks. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Intermodal providers

Rail News

Knight-Swift says it backs Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Ocean carriers are seeking to curb the sharp decline in spot rates in the run-up to next month’s Golden Week holiday. </div>

Ocean carriers are seeking to curb the sharp decline in spot rates in the run-up to next month’s Golden Week holiday.

<div class="phx-topic">The next few weeks on the trans-Pacific trade will be telling as time is running out for container lines to adjust capacity to falling demand or risk losing contracted cargo to the spot market. A slight bump last week in container spot rates, as measured by the Platts and Shanghai Shipping Exchange indexes, could be a sign of blank sailings ending the sharp dive in rates that began in late May, or merely a blip. The run-up to Golden Week that starts Oct. 1, a period of slowing China production due to the holiday observance, gives carriers the last major window this year to stem the rate bleed or see shippers neglect contracted allocations in favor of cheaper spot rates. Ocean carriers are seeking rate increases of $800 to $900 per FEU, sources say, with one carrier representative noting the efforts are focused on curbing the rate erosion of the last two months. Container spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast are about $2,000 per FEU, according to various indexes, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange registering a 65% drop since June. Container lines thus far have been modest in blanking capacity despite falling rates and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-retailers-project-big-year-over-year-import-declines-to-close-out-2025-6060323">weak forecasts for year-end volumes</a>. But analysts and forwarders warn that a sharp increase in blanks is nearly inevitable. Carriers’ averseness to losing import <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/toll-of-us-tariffs-begins-to-emerge-on-unsettled-trans-pacific-6065761">volumes already weakened by US tariff frontloading</a>, the potential for a late-year surge, and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/niche-carriers-plan-to-ride-out-declining-spot-rates-on-the-trans-pacific-6071722">niche carriers sticking to the trade</a> have kept blanking levels consistent with past years. <h3>More capacity coming in October </h3>Container lines plan to inject more capacity in October, nonetheless, adding nearly 100,000 TEUs more than what’s deployed in September, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. The share of tonnage deployed on Asia to the US West Coast that is made unusable through blank sailings hovered near 8.4% in August, and carriers so far plan to blank a similar proportion of tonnage in September and October, although that can rise as weeks progress. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d0dc514b-60a6-4b10-862a-081c37b36db2"></dynamic-object></div>If carriers can’t adjust demand to supply, they face the risk of more shippers turning to the spot market rather than fulfilling contracted cargo allocations. Spot rates, as measured by various indexes, are at levels that many small and medium-sized shippers signed contracts at in the spring. Short-term ocean rates, as measured by benchmarking provider Xeneta, began falling in early August below contract rates covering 88 days or more. The short-term cost to ship an FEU from Asia to the US West Coast was $1,319 for the week ending Aug. 28, compared with $1,597 for the long-term rate in the same period. “We've got customers who are eager to save $100 anywhere, and they want a piece of that,” said a forwarder who did not want to be identified. “We are not trying to sell it, but when they ask us, ‘What are your FAK rates?’ We can’t tell them, ‘No, we’re not going to offer you our FAK rates,’ especially if it means we’re going to get some incremental business out of it.”<div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="98a0037a-3658-44f2-86a3-be3148b993eb"></dynamic-object></div>Small and medium-sized importers signed service contract rates at a larger-than-usual premium than the largest retailers in mid-April just as the market was showing strength, said another forwarder. The largest big-box retailers signed contracts that generally began May 1 in the range of $1,600 to $1,800 per FEU, while midsize and smaller importers secured contract rates in the range of $2,000 to $2,200 per FEU. The danger importers face chasing cheaper spot rates when the rates are falling is that carriers will be loath to help out cargo owners when the market inevitably tightens — even if it’s short-lived. Container lines are more agile in moving vessels to and from ocean trades by omitting calls to ports or voiding sailings, according to an Aug. 28 notice sent by forwarder American Shipping Co. to its customers that was seen by the Journal of Commerce. While such tools to manage capacity haven’t had much impact in recent months, “if timed right, it can have a direct impact on the freight rates,” the notice read. Most shippers are not concerned about carriers charging them for dead freight if they do not fill the minimum quantity commitments (MQCs) in their contracts because, historically, carriers have never done that. Carriers normally roll over the unused MQCs into the next year’s contracts. So far, the shift from contracted cargo to spot cargo has been minimal, according to forwarders and carriers who spoke with the Journal of Commerce. But the inflection point is getting closer. “It could happen” that more BCOs turn to the spot market if rates reverse course in the coming weeks and begin dropping again toward $1,600 to the West Coast and $2,600 to the East Coast, said Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV Global Logistics. “If the West Coast spot rate sinks to $1,400, some BCOs will seek to reopen their contracts, or they could book more under spot,” Kauffman said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a>. Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report. </div>

The next few weeks on the trans-Pacific trade will be telling as time is running out for container lines to adjust capacity to falling demand or risk losing contracted cargo to the spot market. A slight bump last week in container spot rates, as measured by the Platts and Shanghai Shipping Exchange indexes, could be a sign of blank sailings ending the sharp dive in rates that began in late May, or merely a blip. The run-up to Golden Week that starts Oct. 1, a period of slowing China production due to the holiday observance, gives carriers the last major window this year to stem the rate bleed or see shippers neglect contracted allocations in favor of cheaper spot rates. Ocean carriers are seeking rate increases of $800 to $900 per FEU, sources say, with one carrier representative noting the efforts are focused on curbing the rate erosion of the last two months. Container spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast are about $2,000 per FEU, according to various indexes, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange registering a 65% drop since June. Container lines thus far have been modest in blanking capacity despite falling rates and weak forecasts for year-end volumes . But analysts and forwarders warn that a sharp increase in blanks is nearly inevitable. Carriers’ averseness to losing import volumes already weakened by US tariff frontloading , the potential for a late-year surge, and niche carriers sticking to the trade have kept blanking levels consistent with past years. More capacity coming in October Container lines plan to inject more capacity in October, nonetheless, adding nearly 100,000 TEUs more than what’s deployed in September, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. The share of tonnage deployed on Asia to the US West Coast that is made unusable through blank sailings hovered near 8.4% in August, and carriers so far plan to blank a similar proportion of tonnage in September and October, although that can rise as weeks progress. If carriers can’t adjust demand to supply, they face the risk of more shippers turning to the spot market rather than fulfilling contracted cargo allocations. Spot rates, as measured by various indexes, are at levels that many small and medium-sized shippers signed contracts at in the spring. Short-term ocean rates, as measured by benchmarking provider Xeneta, began falling in early August below contract rates covering 88 days or more. The short-term cost to ship an FEU from Asia to the US West Coast was $1,319 for the week ending Aug. 28, compared with $1,597 for the long-term rate in the same period. “We've got customers who are eager to save $100 anywhere, and they want a piece of that,” said a forwarder who did not want to be identified. “We are not trying to sell it, but when they ask us, ‘What are your FAK rates?’ We can’t tell them, ‘No, we’re not going to offer you our FAK rates,’ especially if it means we’re going to get some incremental business out of it.” Small and medium-sized importers signed service contract rates at a larger-than-usual premium than the largest retailers in mid-April just as the market was showing strength, said another forwarder. The largest big-box retailers signed contracts that generally began May 1 in the range of $1,600 to $1,800 per FEU, while midsize and smaller importers secured contract rates in the range of $2,000 to $2,200 per FEU. The danger importers face chasing cheaper spot rates when the rates are falling is that carriers will be loath to help out cargo owners when the market inevitably tightens — even if it’s short-lived. Container lines are more agile in moving vessels to and from ocean trades by omitting calls to ports or voiding sailings, according to an Aug. 28 notice sent by forwarder American Shipping Co. to its customers that was seen by the Journal of Commerce. While such tools to manage capacity haven’t had much impact in recent months, “if timed right, it can have a direct impact on the freight rates,” the notice read. Most shippers are not concerned about carriers charging them for dead freight if they do not fill the minimum quantity commitments (MQCs) in their contracts because, historically, carriers have never done that. Carriers normally roll over the unused MQCs into the next year’s contracts. So far, the shift from contracted cargo to spot cargo has been minimal, according to forwarders and carriers who spoke with the Journal of Commerce. But the inflection point is getting closer. “It could happen” that more BCOs turn to the spot market if rates reverse course in the coming weeks and begin dropping again toward $1,600 to the West Coast and $2,600 to the East Coast, said Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV Global Logistics. “If the West Coast spot rate sinks to $1,400, some BCOs will seek to reopen their contracts, or they could book more under spot,” Kauffman said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com . Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report.

Forwarding

Trans-Pacific

Ocean market in trans-Pacific arrives at spot pricing tipping point

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The former NYK Line executive was a swashbuckling figure who epitomized an era of influential and charismatic US heads of European and Asian container lines — figures who dominated the US landscape with levels of authority that have long since given way to headquarter supremacy.</div>

The former NYK Line executive was a swashbuckling figure who epitomized an era of influential and charismatic US heads of European and Asian container lines — figures who dominated the US landscape with levels of authority that have long since given way to headquarter supremacy.

<div class="phx-topic">The passing of <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/dodd-fiori-ex-nyk-north-america-executive-dead-at-82-6067734">former NYK Line executive Dodd Fiori on Aug. 16 at 82</a> is cause to look back on the heyday of his career in the 1990s, a period of profound change in the industry that culminated in an ultimately futile legislative effort to set the industry on a path toward value creation both for itself and its customers. Fiori was a swashbuckling figure who epitomized an era of influential and charismatic US heads of European and Asian container lines — figures who dominated the US landscape with levels of authority that have long since given way to headquarter supremacy within carrier organizations. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6073367_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Figures such as Capt. Nicola Arena of Mediterranean Shipping Co., Oscar J. Abello of “K” Line, Conrad Everhard of Cho Yang, A.B. “Ted” Ruhly of Maersk and Rudy Mack of Hapag-Lloyd rode astride the US industry and had the authority to be go-to sources for deals by shippers and forwarders. The lack of such figures in the US industry today means many large beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) regularly make pilgrimages to carrier headquarters to lock in capacity — the customer traveling to see the vendor — reflecting how the nexus of power within carriers gravitated from regions such as the US to Geneva, Marseille, Shanghai, Hamburg, Singapore and Copenhagen. But years ago, it was the regional leadership that was firmly in charge, especially in the US, where the regional heads were on the frontlines in dealing with customers and regulators. An example was Fiori negotiating NYK’s first contract with Walmart based on the carrier’s new Asia-East Coast via the Suez Canal route, the famed AEX service, which played to the retailer’s desire to land goods closer to East Coast store locations. “While the early 1990’s was still an era where the container industry had sustained periods of excess capacity, the Asia to East Coast [via Panama or Suez] was still somewhat of a niche market and not characterized by severe excess supply; that would of course change,” recalled Sam Ruda, who worked under Fiori before going on to other roles, including heading the Port of New York and New Jersey. “So, in this lane, at least in the early 1990’s, the power balance between the carrier and the shipper was more even,” Ruda said. “Dodd really played into this dynamic in the meeting with Walmart. The West Coast was not really the strategic imperative for Walmart. They needed capacity and service in the emerging East Coast lane from Asia via the canal routings.” <h3>Shippers emerge as a ‘power center’ </h3>While the 1990s saw the emergence of shippers such as Walmart, whose business model was based on supply chain, parallel and interconnected changes were underway that Fiori and other carrier heads were in the middle of. The period saw the emergence of shippers as a power center and the parallel demise of the decades-old conference system, where rate levels were set by conference carriers with little room for flexibility via “independent action” on rates. The idea to replace that system, supported by Fiori and other US industry leaders, as well as shippers, was enshrined in the deregulatory 1998 Ocean Shipping Reform Act, forged out of consensus among all key players. (That was in direct contrast to OSRA-22, which, in an entirely different political environment, was passed over carriers’ objections). The idea in 1998 was that win-win contractual relationships would result from allowing shippers and carriers for the first time to sign confidential contracts not subject to collective pricing actions by conferences. That vision, it seems fair to say, was never realized. At the first TPM in 2001, then-APL CEO Flemming Jacobs based his keynote speech on the need for value-creating relationships to emerge, which had yet to happen three years after the law passed. It was not hard to understand why. Consolidation at that time was still in its early stages. And persistent overcapacity and most shippers’ unwillingness to pay a premium for reliable service created tensions, especially with traditional conference carriers such as NYK and APL, whose services were based on reliability, with rates set 5% to 10% above non-conference lines. <h3>‘In the middle’ of tension </h3>During the 1990s, “the carrier side had sustained periods of overcapacity. Profitability for the carriers was elusive. And this lack of profitability created a lot of underlying tension between the [NYK] home office [in Tokyo] and the regional offices [in the US],” Ruda said. “I think this tension was true across the entire carrier industry. Dodd was right in the middle of this tension.” As the conference system faltered, the deregulated market that replaced it made it increasingly unprofitable for carriers to invest in the extra fuel needed to speed up to maintain schedules. Some carriers spent on extra fuel anyway in an elusive bid to extract premium rates until number crunches later exposed the folly of the spending. That pressure has carried through to the present day, with a key difference being that most carriers seem to have largely given up on the idea of reliability or are minimally focused on it. They prefer instead to see capacity absorbed by port congestion or geopolitical shocks, which resulted in the all-time record profits earned during and after COVID-19, including in the first half of 2025. If Fiori’s day saw the impact of overcapacity, that was partly due to the number of carriers serving the east-west trades being much greater than today. In the 1990s, 12 major conference carriers and five non-conference carriers were operating in the trans-Pacific, said Mike DiVirgilio, who worked under Fiori at NYK. That has now changed. “With a steady stream of mergers, acquisitions and a few bankruptcies, the carrier side has undergone a tectonic transformation,” Ruda said. “From a carrier perspective, consolidation enables significantly improved capability to better manage capacity which then enables improved pricing power and thus, the ability to charge rate levels that offer a return on capital.” While overcapacity is asserting itself again in the second half of 2025, consolidation has resulted in the top 10 carriers controlling 84% of capacity, according to Alphaliner, a fundamental change from the 1990s. “The ‘3-Cs’ have played out on a global scale in the container industry: consolidation, capacity management and the ability to charge [pricing power],” Ruda said. Contact Peter Tirschwell at <a href="mailto:peter.tirschwell@spglobal.com">peter.tirschwell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

The passing of former NYK Line executive Dodd Fiori on Aug. 16 at 82 is cause to look back on the heyday of his career in the 1990s, a period of profound change in the industry that culminated in an ultimately futile legislative effort to set the industry on a path toward value creation both for itself and its customers. Fiori was a swashbuckling figure who epitomized an era of influential and charismatic US heads of European and Asian container lines — figures who dominated the US landscape with levels of authority that have long since given way to headquarter supremacy within carrier organizations. Figures such as Capt. Nicola Arena of Mediterranean Shipping Co., Oscar J. Abello of “K” Line, Conrad Everhard of Cho Yang, A.B. “Ted” Ruhly of Maersk and Rudy Mack of Hapag-Lloyd rode astride the US industry and had the authority to be go-to sources for deals by shippers and forwarders. The lack of such figures in the US industry today means many large beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) regularly make pilgrimages to carrier headquarters to lock in capacity — the customer traveling to see the vendor — reflecting how the nexus of power within carriers gravitated from regions such as the US to Geneva, Marseille, Shanghai, Hamburg, Singapore and Copenhagen. But years ago, it was the regional leadership that was firmly in charge, especially in the US, where the regional heads were on the frontlines in dealing with customers and regulators. An example was Fiori negotiating NYK’s first contract with Walmart based on the carrier’s new Asia-East Coast via the Suez Canal route, the famed AEX service, which played to the retailer’s desire to land goods closer to East Coast store locations. “While the early 1990’s was still an era where the container industry had sustained periods of excess capacity, the Asia to East Coast [via Panama or Suez] was still somewhat of a niche market and not characterized by severe excess supply; that would of course change,” recalled Sam Ruda, who worked under Fiori before going on to other roles, including heading the Port of New York and New Jersey. “So, in this lane, at least in the early 1990’s, the power balance between the carrier and the shipper was more even,” Ruda said. “Dodd really played into this dynamic in the meeting with Walmart. The West Coast was not really the strategic imperative for Walmart. They needed capacity and service in the emerging East Coast lane from Asia via the canal routings.” Shippers emerge as a ‘power center’ While the 1990s saw the emergence of shippers such as Walmart, whose business model was based on supply chain, parallel and interconnected changes were underway that Fiori and other carrier heads were in the middle of. The period saw the emergence of shippers as a power center and the parallel demise of the decades-old conference system, where rate levels were set by conference carriers with little room for flexibility via “independent action” on rates. The idea to replace that system, supported by Fiori and other US industry leaders, as well as shippers, was enshrined in the deregulatory 1998 Ocean Shipping Reform Act, forged out of consensus among all key players. (That was in direct contrast to OSRA-22, which, in an entirely different political environment, was passed over carriers’ objections). The idea in 1998 was that win-win contractual relationships would result from allowing shippers and carriers for the first time to sign confidential contracts not subject to collective pricing actions by conferences. That vision, it seems fair to say, was never realized. At the first TPM in 2001, then-APL CEO Flemming Jacobs based his keynote speech on the need for value-creating relationships to emerge, which had yet to happen three years after the law passed. It was not hard to understand why. Consolidation at that time was still in its early stages. And persistent overcapacity and most shippers’ unwillingness to pay a premium for reliable service created tensions, especially with traditional conference carriers such as NYK and APL, whose services were based on reliability, with rates set 5% to 10% above non-conference lines. ‘In the middle’ of tension During the 1990s, “the carrier side had sustained periods of overcapacity. Profitability for the carriers was elusive. And this lack of profitability created a lot of underlying tension between the [NYK] home office [in Tokyo] and the regional offices [in the US],” Ruda said. “I think this tension was true across the entire carrier industry. Dodd was right in the middle of this tension.” As the conference system faltered, the deregulated market that replaced it made it increasingly unprofitable for carriers to invest in the extra fuel needed to speed up to maintain schedules. Some carriers spent on extra fuel anyway in an elusive bid to extract premium rates until number crunches later exposed the folly of the spending. That pressure has carried through to the present day, with a key difference being that most carriers seem to have largely given up on the idea of reliability or are minimally focused on it. They prefer instead to see capacity absorbed by port congestion or geopolitical shocks, which resulted in the all-time record profits earned during and after COVID-19, including in the first half of 2025. If Fiori’s day saw the impact of overcapacity, that was partly due to the number of carriers serving the east-west trades being much greater than today. In the 1990s, 12 major conference carriers and five non-conference carriers were operating in the trans-Pacific, said Mike DiVirgilio, who worked under Fiori at NYK. That has now changed. “With a steady stream of mergers, acquisitions and a few bankruptcies, the carrier side has undergone a tectonic transformation,” Ruda said. “From a carrier perspective, consolidation enables significantly improved capability to better manage capacity which then enables improved pricing power and thus, the ability to charge rate levels that offer a return on capital.” While overcapacity is asserting itself again in the second half of 2025, consolidation has resulted in the top 10 carriers controlling 84% of capacity, according to Alphaliner, a fundamental change from the 1990s. “The ‘3-Cs’ have played out on a global scale in the container industry: consolidation, capacity management and the ability to charge [pricing power],” Ruda said. Contact Peter Tirschwell at peter.tirschwell@spglobal.com .

Dodd Fiori’s passing harks back to a bygone era in US shipping

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal. </div>

The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal.

<div class="phx-topic">DP World is seeking to operate a long-planned, nearly C$1.6 billion container terminal in Montreal that the new Canadian government is backing amid its shift away from US trade dependence.The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with an annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase Canada’s second-largest container port by capacity 150%. DP World, which operates at Vancouver and Prince Rupert the first- and third-largest ports in Canada, respectively, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-29/dp-world-vies-for-deal-to-run-montreal-port-championed-by-carney">confirmed to Bloomberg</a> that it was involved in project negotiations. DP said in a statement it was always exploring ways to expand its network in Canada and increase investment in the country. “While we see strong potential for developing logistics infrastructure in Montreal that drives economic growth and long-term value, we have no announcements to share at this time,” said a DP World spokesperson. Since the port failed to attract a bidder in 2021, the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/quebec-provides-new-funding-for-proposed-montreal-terminal-citing-us-trade-tensions-5947783">Contrecoeur project has received</a> C$130 million from the Quebec provincial government and C$130 million from Canada’s infrastructure bank for construction. Prime Minister Mark Carney last week said that he was seeking to fast-track the Contrecoeur project and highlighted <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/carney-has-fresh-opportunity-to-galvanize-canadian-shipping-industry-6047928">newly passed legislation streamlining regulatory</a> approval for major infrastructure projects. The C$1.57 billion project, which is located 43 miles downriver from legacy Montreal terminals along the St. Lawrence River, requires extensive dredging and shoring up portions of the waterway. MPA seeks to begin construction as early as October and open the facility in 2029. The authority in 2022 <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/montreal-relaunches-search-process-for-contrecoeur-terminal-operator-5204826">sent bid invitations</a> to Axium Infrastructure Canada and Pomerleau Capital, Ports America Holdings, and Terminal Investment Limited, in which Mediterranean Shipping Co. owns a majority stake. The port originally planned to have the first phase of the project finished by 2024 and had identified three finalist but scrapped plans. DP World operates the Centerm facility in Vancouver and solely operates at Prince Rupert and Port Saint John. Montreal’s four existing container terminals are operated by two companies, Montreal Gateway Terminals Partnership and Termont Montreal.Container volumes through Montreal last year slipped 1%, to approximately 750,500 TEUs compared with 2023, according to MPA. Sporadic labor issues and the Port of New York and New Jersey’s ability to attract more exports from the Midwest have contributed to volume declines in recent years, with traffic down 8.9% in 2024 compared with 2020. Container volume, however, is up nearly 6.5% in the first seven months of this year on a year-over-year basis. While the port began the project in the late 1980s, work has gathered speed in the last decade, Julie Gascon, CEO and president of MPA, said on a Journal of Commerce webinar on May 22. The need to diversify away from US trade due to high tariffs has only added more momentum to the project. “If there is a 6% shift of Canadian exports from us to other international markets, Montreal would get at capacity very, very quickly, so it’s not just a project for the future, it’s a project that is urgent,” Gascon said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

DP World is seeking to operate a long-planned, nearly C$1.6 billion container terminal in Montreal that the new Canadian government is backing amid its shift away from US trade dependence. The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with an annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase Canada’s second-largest container port by capacity 150%. DP World, which operates at Vancouver and Prince Rupert the first- and third-largest ports in Canada, respectively, confirmed to Bloomberg that it was involved in project negotiations. DP said in a statement it was always exploring ways to expand its network in Canada and increase investment in the country. “While we see strong potential for developing logistics infrastructure in Montreal that drives economic growth and long-term value, we have no announcements to share at this time,” said a DP World spokesperson. Since the port failed to attract a bidder in 2021, the Contrecoeur project has received C$130 million from the Quebec provincial government and C$130 million from Canada’s infrastructure bank for construction. Prime Minister Mark Carney last week said that he was seeking to fast-track the Contrecoeur project and highlighted newly passed legislation streamlining regulatory approval for major infrastructure projects. The C$1.57 billion project, which is located 43 miles downriver from legacy Montreal terminals along the St. Lawrence River, requires extensive dredging and shoring up portions of the waterway. MPA seeks to begin construction as early as October and open the facility in 2029. The authority in 2022 sent bid invitations to Axium Infrastructure Canada and Pomerleau Capital, Ports America Holdings, and Terminal Investment Limited, in which Mediterranean Shipping Co. owns a majority stake. The port originally planned to have the first phase of the project finished by 2024 and had identified three finalist but scrapped plans. DP World operates the Centerm facility in Vancouver and solely operates at Prince Rupert and Port Saint John. Montreal’s four existing container terminals are operated by two companies, Montreal Gateway Terminals Partnership and Termont Montreal. Container volumes through Montreal last year slipped 1%, to approximately 750,500 TEUs compared with 2023, according to MPA. Sporadic labor issues and the Port of New York and New Jersey’s ability to attract more exports from the Midwest have contributed to volume declines in recent years, with traffic down 8.9% in 2024 compared with 2020. Container volume, however, is up nearly 6.5% in the first seven months of this year on a year-over-year basis. While the port began the project in the late 1980s, work has gathered speed in the last decade, Julie Gascon, CEO and president of MPA, said on a Journal of Commerce webinar on May 22. The need to diversify away from US trade due to high tariffs has only added more momentum to the project. “If there is a 6% shift of Canadian exports from us to other international markets, Montreal would get at capacity very, very quickly, so it’s not just a project for the future, it’s a project that is urgent,” Gascon said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com .

Marine terminals

North American ports

DP World aims to run Carney-backed Montreal terminal

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!

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 ESSW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED

Use code ESSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code ESSGW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

At SSA Marine Mexico, we firmly believe that business development must go hand in hand with social and environmental well-being. Our vision is not solely focused on operating efficiently, but also on creating a meaningful and positive impact in the communities where we are present. Since 1995, we have reaffirmed this commitment through tangible actions that reflect our core values of responsibility, solidarity, and sustainability. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584535914_Photo%201.jpg" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit"> A Year of Major Achievements Over the past year, we allocated more than $107,000 USD to the implementation of 60 social and environmental projects, positively impacting over 7,800 people across various regions of Mexico. Each initiative was designed with a holistic approach, addressing key areas that contribute to long-term community development. Education: Laying the Foundation for the Future Education is one of the most powerful tools to promote social mobility and equitable development. At SSA Marine Mexico, we support academic initiatives that inspire and empower the next generation of leaders. One of our most impactful partnerships was with the University of Colima, where we sponsored the “Reto Camp” program. This initiative encourages university students to develop innovative solutions in the fields of sustainability, logistics, and port operations, offering them mentorship, tools, and real-world challenges to solve. In addition, we donated microscopes, school supplies, and educational materials to institutions in underserved communities, helping to improve the learning environment and provide students with the resources they need to succeed. Health and Sports: Promoting Wellness We believe that healthy communities are strong communities. We have supported several local sporting events and provided direct assistance to talented athletes, enabling them to pursue their passions and represent their regions with pride. Beyond sports, we also strengthened our collaboration with critical emergency response organizations such as the Mexican Red Cross and Civil Protection. Our contributions helped enhance their readiness and capabilities in times of crisis, ensuring better outcomes for those affected by emergencies. Supporting Vulnerable Groups: Reaching Those Who Need It Most A core part of our social responsibility efforts is directed toward supporting vulnerable populations. We have contributed to a range of initiatives focused on children, migrants, and at-risk families. These efforts included donations to orphanages and shelters, as well as support for the National Institute of Migration and grassroots organizations dedicated to protecting and empowering people facing adversity. By standing with those in need, we reinforce our commitment to inclusion and social justice, values that are central to our identity as a responsible company. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584944645_Photo%202.png" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit">Culture: Strengthening Community Identity Cultural identity is a key element in building resilient and united communities. At SSA Marine Mexico, we actively participate in the organization and sponsorship of cultural events that celebrate local traditions and foster civic pride. Working alongside port authorities and municipal governments, we helped bring music, art, and heritage to the forefront, creating spaces for community engagement and intercultural dialogue. Environment: Investing in the Planet Our commitment to sustainability goes beyond operations—it’s a philosophy that drives every decision we make. We have partnered with environmental institutions to carry out reforestation campaigns, beach cleanups, and conservation efforts. In collaboration with the Institute for the Environment, we supported initiatives aimed at decarbonization, biodiversity protection, and environmental education. By involving our employees and local volunteers in these actions, we also foster a culture of environmental stewardship throughout our organization and our surrounding communities. Innovation for a Sustainable Future Sustainability is not just about doing good—it’s also about doing things better. In 2024, we invested $22 million USD in the acquisition of 11 state-of-the-art E-RTG cranes. These electric rubber-tired gantry cranes represent a significant technological advancement in port equipment. Seven of them are already operating on clean electric energy, resulting in a reduction of nearly 4,000 tons of CO₂ emissions and improving operational efficiency by 7%. The remaining four cranes are fully compatible with future electrification, underscoring our long-term strategy to modernize our operations in an environmentally responsible way. This investment is part of a broader innovation roadmap that includes digitalization, automation, and cleaner energy sources—all designed to ensure that our ports continue to grow without compromising the health of our planet. Building a Better Tomorrow, Together At SSA Marine Mexico, we understand that sustainability is a shared and ongoing responsibility. True impact requires collaboration across sectors, long-term vision, and unwavering commitment. That is why we continue to work hand-in-hand with local authorities, non-profit organizations, universities, and our own employees to create solutions that are both scalable and sustainable. Our journey is far from over. In the years ahead, we will continue to deepen our community engagement, explore cleaner technologies, and strengthen the social fabric of the regions where we operate. Each initiative, no matter the size, is a step toward building a future where business success goes hand-in-hand with human and environmental prosperity. We are proud of what we have achieved in 2024, but we are even more excited about what lies ahead. SSA Marine Mexico — Moving the World, Caring for People and Planet. LINK: https://www.ssamarine.mx/

Photo 2.png

SSA Marine Mexico: True Commitment to Sustainability

START A FREE TRIAL: Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

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

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

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

Upgrade Subscription

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW995 to save $500 on an annual Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

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

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

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

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

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

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

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

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The Journal of Commerce’s air cargo news covers the movement of air cargo, including air cargo shipping, air cargo carriers, air freight forwarders, air freight, air shipments, cargo airports and cargo news. It also tracks air cargo trends, air freight news, shifting of cargo between air and ocean, airports and airfreight delays and congestion.

Journal of Commerce offers extensive air freight forwarder news and analysis of air cargo forwarding, including topics such as strategies, capacity, services.

Air Cargo Forwarder News | Journal of Commerce

Air Cargo Forwarder News

Stay informed with air cargo carriers news. Journal of Commerce covers updates on air cargo carriers, air craft carrier capacity, rates routings and technology.

Air Cargo Carriers News | Journal of Commerce

Air Cargo Carriers News

Get the latest air cargo news and analysis with JOC. From carriers to trends, get insights into air freight news, air cargo shipping, and more.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Congestion choking Mundra Port threatens North India cargo flow

Knight-Swift says it backs Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal

Ocean market in trans-Pacific arrives at spot pricing tipping point